IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 107 OF 2007 The Shree Sanatan Dharam Education Society & Anr. ..... ...... ......Petitioners V/s The Mun. Corpn. Of Gr. Mumbai & Ors.. ...... ......Respondents. Ms.Prem Thakkar i/by Mr.Kedar Dighe, Adv. For the petitioners. Mr.J.S.Saluja, AGP for the State. Ms.Sajithkumar, Adv. For BMC. Mr.R.M.Pandey, Adv. For the intervenor. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & A.P.DESHPANDE, J. DATED: 18th SEPTEMBER, 2008. PC: The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioners praying that the respondents be directed to initiate and complete the acquisition proceedings with regard to plot bearing CTS Nos.453B and 454 of village Wadhavali, Chembur, Mumbai which is a playground and permit the petitioner to participate in the acquisition proceedings. 1 Certain other consequential reliefs are also prayed for. It may be noticed that some correspondence has taken place between the petitioner and the Corporation. However during the pendency of the petition the Corporation had also decided to make alternate offer to the petitioner which was recorded by this Court in its order dated 21.8.2008. Applications by way of chamber summons have been filed for impledment of the applicants as party respondents as there was some dispute between the owners of the property. According to them they have purchased the property by registered sale deed in August, 1957. There is dispute with regard to ownership rights in relation to the property as one of the applicant states that the property is joint HUF property and is presently managed by its Karta and no other person can make a claim. 2. Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 have no independent stand except that they have asked the Corporation to go ahead with acquisition proceedings. 3. This is not the case where this Court should interfere under 2 Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However we direct the Corporation to hear the petitioner, the owners and other interested parties and pass appropriate orders finally deciding the issue as to whether they wish go with acquisition proceedings or not and consider various pros and cons including the offer which was said to be made to the petitioner as recorded in the order dated 21.8.2008. We hope that the Corporation will act expeditiously and not delay the proceedings further unnecessarily. Writ petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE A.P.DESHPANDE, J. 3