1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1481 OF 2010 Mak Pan Associates ....Petitioner V/s. Pimpri Chinchwad New Township Development Authority & Ors. ....Respondents Mr.P.K. Dhakephalkar, Senior Counsel with Mr.S.V. Pitre for the Petitioner. Mr.Vijay Patil for Respondent No.1. Mr.V.S. Gokhale, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.2 to 5. CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND R.M. SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 7TH APRIL, 2010. P.C. :- 1. In deference to the observations made in our order dated 30.3.2010, the counsel appearing for the Development Authority as well as the State Government, on instructions, state that although a composite Notification has been issued under Section 6(1) of the Land Acquisition Act read with Section 126(4) of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act and Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, the authorities shall not give effect to the urgency clause invoked by them to take over possession of the suit land forthwith. Instead, the authorities would await passing of the award as per law. 2. Mr.Dhakephalkar insists that the Court may record that the 2 award be passed after following due process of law. No submission has been advanced on behalf of the authorities that they would hasten the matter and not follow the process envisaged under the relevant provisions before passing of the award. The apprehension of the Petitioner that the Petitioner would not be heard, as the authorities have withdrawn Section 9 Notification, is completely misplaced and ill-advised. The said withdrawal is on account of the order of the status-quo passed by the Court in the previous Writ Petition and not with a view to pass Award without following the necessary procedure. 3. In view of the above, the counsel for the Petitioner withdraws the other challenges in this Petition. The Petition, accordingly, is dismissed as withdrawn. (R.M. SAVANT, J.) (A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.)