IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.331 OF 2006 Govind Vishnu Salunkhe & Anr.Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors..Respondents Ms. Usha Purohit, for the Petitioners Mr. G.W. Mattos, AGP for Respondents CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: F.I. REBELLO F.I. REBELLO F.I. REBELLO & ANOOP ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. V. MOHTA, JJ. V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE DATE DATE :31ST MARCH, 2006. P.C. . Learned Counsel for Respondents on taking instructions makes a statement that no new building has been put up in the place of the building that was demolished. The petitioners, it is set out, were offered alternative accommodation in the year 2004. That was not accepted. Learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that it was not accepted as the premises were not suitable to the petitioners. 2. In the event any other alternative premises are available the respondents to make an offer to the petitioner No.1 who is the person entitled for rehabilitation. It will be open to the petitioner No.2 to agitate his claim independently before the Respondents. With the above observations petition stands disposed of. (F.I. (F.I. (F.I. REBELLO J) REBELLO J) REBELLO J) (ANOOP (ANOOP (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) V. MOHTA, J.) V. MOHTA, J.)