1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. WRIT PETITION NO.1202 OF 2008 Vishwanath Dattatraya Borkar ..Petitioner. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents. .... Mr. Prasad Pathare i/b Mr. Rajesh Bindra for the Petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Jadhav, AGP for Respondents 1 and 2. Ms T.H. Puranik for Respondents 3 and 4 – BMC. Mr. Vibhav Krishna with Mr. Reshant Shah and Mr. Ashish Shah i/ b M/s. Juris Consillis for Respondents 5 and 6. .... CORAM : DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. 10th November, 2009. P.C. : By an order of the Division Bench dated 29th September, 2007 this Court recorded the statement of the AGP and counsel appearing on behalf of the Municipal Corporation that the Writ Petition would be treated as a representation and that appropriate orders would be passed within eight weeks. The Municipal Corporation has after hearing the Petitioner passed an order dated 4th February, 2008 while MHADA has passed an order dated 21st July, 2008. 2 Even a bare perusal of the order passed by the Municipal Corporation would show that though all the submissions of the Petitioner have been noted, the submissions have not been dealt with in the reasoning. In this view of the matter, it would be appropriate and proper to direct that the Executive Engineer (Building Proposals), Easterrn Suburbs, shall pass a fresh order dealing with the specific grievance of the Petitioner. In order to obviate any ambiguity it would be appropriate to direct that the Petitioner shall file a specific representation within a period of two weeks from today setting out the illegalities which he alleges in the work of redevelopment that has been carried on at the site in question. The Executive Engineer shall pass a fresh order after hearing all the concerned parties. In order to facilitate this exercise, the impugned order dated 4th February, 2008 is set aside. Upon remand a fresh order shall be passed preferably within a period of three months from today. The Petition is accordingly disposed of. *****