21.wp.716-10 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITON NO.716 OF 2010 Smt.Anjana Kedari Redekar. ..Petitioner. Versus Union of India and others. ..Respondents. ... Mr.P.K. Dhakephalkar, Senior Advocate i/b. N.V. Bandiwadekar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.S.C. Gangal, Advocate for the Respondent Nos.2,3 & 4. ... CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 02, 2010. P.C. 1. The learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4 says that the marks have been alloted, but, decision to allot dealership will be taken only after physical verification of the documents and the spot. He further states that if the petitioner makes any representation in relation to the marks that have been alloted to respondent No.5, then that representation will also be considered in the process of field 21.wp.716-10 2 investigation. Statement is accepted. In view of this statement, in our opinion, no orders are necessary in the Petition as the petitioner can make his representation putting up his point of view before the respondents and the respondents have assured that in case such a representation is made it will be looked into. Petition is, therefore, disposed of. (D.K. DESHMUKH,J.) (A.R. JOSHI, J.)