1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5382 OF 2009 Sanjay Laxman Darekar .. Petitioner. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. Respondents. Mr.Aniket P.Ranade for the petitioner. Mr.Rakesh Bhatkar i/b Smt.P.A.Birje for respondent nos.2 and 3. Ms.P.S.Cordozo A.G.P. for the State. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE, J. DATED : 16TH DECEMBER, 2009 P.C. . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents waives service. By consent, the petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at the admission stage itself. 3. By this writ petition the petitioner has impugned the order dated 6.1.2009 passed by the Collector, Ratnagiri, by which project affected person certificate dated 17.6.2008 issued in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled. There is no dispute that this order has been passed by the Collector even without issuing notice to the petitioner. In view thereof learned counsel for the parties have fairly agreed that I need not record detail reasons for disposing of this writ petition and they have agreed 2 for the following order: The order dated 6.1.2009 passed by the Collector, Ratnagiri (Exhibit-D to the petition) is set aside. The Collector, Ratnagiri shall pass fresh order after giving an opportunity of being heard to all concerned parties as expeditiously as possible and preferrably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The petitioner is directed to produce a copy of this order before the Collector within a period of four weeks from today. The Collector, Ratnagiri, shall decide the matter afresh on merits in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. It is made clear that while passing this order I shall not be understood to have examined merits of the case. Rule is, accordingly, made absolute. No costs. (D. B. Bhosale, J.)