( 1 ) wp5508.09 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5508 OF 2009 Ram Lakshan s/o. Dashrath Singh and Anr. .. Petitioners Versus The Aurangabad Municipal Corporation & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. P.R. Patil h/f. Mr. J.R. Shah, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.N. Pagare, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1,2,4 & 5. Mr. R.N. Dhorde h/f. Mr. V.R. Dhorde, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE & R.M. BORDE,JJ. DATED : 21.02.2011 P.C. :- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. We have perused the prayers made in the writ petition. From bare perusal of the prayers, we are satisfied that the dispute essentially is between the petitioners and respondent No.3, who are neighbours. The basic contention of the petitioners is that the open space, that is required to be maintained while making construction, had not been maintained by respondent ( 2 ) wp5508.09 No.3. Respondent No.3 has made construction after getting the plan sanctioned from the Municipal Corporation. The Municipal Corporation has filed reply affidavit and in paragraph 3 thereof, have stated thus : “3. As regards contents of para no.3 & 4, I say and submit that the area of plot owned and possessed by respondent no.3 is less than 250 sq.mtrs. and the plan is sanctioned by Corporation in pursuance to the norms set out in table-N of Development Control Rules. These rules under table- N at sr.no.5 provide that there should be set back of 3 mtrs from road side 3 mtrs set back from rear side and one side should be 2.25 mtrs and fourth side can be kept as common. It is also submitted that the plan has been scrutinized by Auto DCR i.e. The Software has been developed which is termed as Auto DCR. As per Auto DCR side margin has been left by respondent no.3 is in confirmative with Auto DCR. Therefore, the Corporation has rightly sanctioned construction permission to respondent no.3 on the basis of Building By laws and Development Control Rules for Aurangabad Municipal Corporation. The copy of Building By Laws and Development Control Rules along with Table – N is annexed hereto and marked as Exhibit R-1 colly.” ( 3 ) wp5508.09 2. Having regard to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Corporation, we are satisfied that respondent No.3 made construction as per the plans sanctioned by the Corporation and that the plans were sanctioned as per the norms set out in table-N of the Development Control Rules. Hence, the writ petition fails and dismissed as such. [R.M. BORDE,J.] [D.B. BHOSALE,J.] snk/2011/FEB11/wp5508.09