1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.465 OF 2011 Dattaram Ganpat Kadam & Ors. .. Petitioners V/s The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Anand Charanbir for the petitioners. Mr.V.D.Patil for Respondent No.4. Mr.S.G.Surana for Respondent No.6. Mr.Shekhar Ingawle, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM: SMT.RANJANA DESAI & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATE : 6th April, 2011 P.C.: 1. Admittedly, the appeal filed by the petitioners is pending in the Slum Tribunal, Mumbai. Learned counsel for the petitioners informed us that the post of the President of Slum Tribunal is lying vacant since 24.11.2010 and therefore the appeal has not been heard. 2. On 05.04.2011 the Division Bench presided over the Hon’ble the Chief Justice has passed an order directing the State Government to appoint the President of the Slum Tribunal as expeditiously as possible preferably by 30th April, 2011. Therefore, the President of the Slum Tribunal will be available by 30th April, 2011 to deal 2 with the petitioners pending appeal. The petitioners can therefore prosecute their pending appeal. In view of this, we are not inclined to deal with the points raised by the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners informed us that the 6th respondent has submitted a proposal for redevelopment of the concerned property which has been accepted on 25.11.2010. If that is so, if the remedy of approaching the High Power Committee against the said order is available to the petitioners they may adopt it if they are so advised. In view of the above, it is not necessary for us to keep this petition pending. The petition is accordingly disposed of. The Slum Tribunal or the High Power Committee shall deal with any proceeding filed by the petitioners independently and in accordance with law. Looking to the controversy involved, we request the High Power Committee to deal with the application of the petitioners, if so made, expeditiously. 3. We make it clear that all the contentions raised by the parties are expressly kept open and we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. (R.G.KETKAR, J.) (SMT.RANJANA DESAI, J.)