1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8264 OF 2008 Shri Nilesh Madhukar Patil .. Petitioner Vs. The Municipal Corporation of the City of Navi Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO.8265 OF 2008 Shri Prabhakar Rama Patil .. Petitioner Vs. The Municipal Corporation of the City of Navi Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO.8272 OF 2008 Shri Atmaram Vitthal Patil .. Petitioner Vs. The Municipal Corporation of the City of Navi Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO.8302 OF 2008 Smt.Anandi Suresh Patil .. Petitioner 2 Vs. The Municipal Corporation of the City of Navi Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondent Mr.R.D.Soni i/b M/s. Ram and Co. for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.8264 of 2008 Mr.R.D.Soni i/b Mr.V.R.Kasare for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.8265 of 2008 Mr.S.N.Gawade for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.8302 and 8272 of 2008 Mr.A.A.Gare for the Municipal Corporation of the City of Navi Mumbai Mr.G.A.Kamlakar i/b M/s.G.S.Hegde and Associates for the CIDCO Mr.V.P.Malvankar, A.G.P. for the State in Writ Petition Nos.8264 of 2008 and 8302 of 2008 Ms.M.P.Thakur, A.G.P. for the State in Writ Petition Nos.8265 of 2008 and 8272 of 2008 CORAM : J. N. Patel & Smt. Mridula Bhatkar, JJ DATE : June 17, 2009 P.C. : 1. The learned counsel for the petitioners state that the petitioners have made representation to the Chief Controller, Unauthorised Construction, CIDCO, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai and the Commissioner of Police which has been filed on 18.12.08 in reply to the notice dated 7.5.08 issued to the petitioner under section 53(1) of the M.R.T.P. Act in respect of the said property. 2. We are informed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that the structure has been demolished as it was unauthorised. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be 3 permitted to withdraw the writ petitions having become infructuous with liberty to prosecute their case before the Competent Authority. 3. Permitted to withdraw with liberty to prosecute their case before the Competent Authority. Petitions dismissed as withdrawn. Needless to state that the authorities would consider the representation made by the petitioners in accordance with law and as expeditiously as possible preferably within 3 months from the date of the disposal of these petitions as infructuous and withdrawn. ( J. N. Patel, J) (Smt.Mridula Bhatkar, J)