IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.334 OF 2008 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.94 OF 2008 Amit Maru and another ... Petitioners v/s. State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents Mr. Mukul Rohatgi i/by Mr. K.P. Bhalerao for the petitioners. Mr. K.K. Singhvi, senior advocate with Mr. A.Y. Sakhare and Ms. A.R. Joshi for the BMC. Mr. R.M. Kadam, Advocate General for the State. Mr. Janak Dwarkadas, senior advocate i/by M/s. W. Gandhy & Co. for the intervenor. Mr. Aspi Chinoy, senior advocate i/by M/s Negandhi, S & H. for the petitioner in writ petition No.2443 of 2008. Ms. Suparna Mitra i/by M/s. D.D. & Carrimjee for the intervenor. Mr. Birendra Saraf i/by Mr. Y.N. Adhia for the intervenor. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 22ND OCTOBER , 2008 P.C.: We have perused this application and we are unable to understand why the applicant should have made averments that have been recorded in portion `A' to `A' of para (e) at typed pages 10 and 11 of the application. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant submits that he has been instructed to pray before the court for striking out this paragraph from Chamber Summons. Accordingly, portion `A' to `A' of paragraph (e) aforenoticed is ordered to be struck of and we direct the applicant to be careful in future. No opposition. The counsel appearing for the applicant submits that they did not wish to raise any further arguments. Chamber summons is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Amended schedule is, therefore, permitted to be taken on record. Additional prayers are permitted to be taken on record. CHIEF JUSTICE V.M. KANADE, J.