1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3497 OF 2009 Abdul Haq Allauddin Ghori .. Petitioner Versus Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondents Mr.B.Unnikrishnan for petitioner Mr.M.M.Malvankar for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 23rd April 2009. P.C. . This petition challenges the order of the Trial Court refusing to restore the suit which is dismissed for non prosecution. The suit was filed challenging the notice of the Corporation initiating steps to demolish the structure which is the subject matter of the suit. The suit structure was protected and continues to be protected by interim orders, is a statement made by Mr.Unnikrishnan on instructions. 2 2. The trial court refused to restore the suit and the complaint is that this refusal is arbitrary because the court below was informed that the Advocate was ill and in personal difficulty. Taking note of this grievance, this Court on 24th March 2009 passed an order recording the statement of Corporation’s Advocate that if an application for regularisation is made, it will be considered in accordance with the prevalent policies and law. Based upon this statement, this Court granted liberty to petitioner to apply for regularisation and report compliance by filing an affidavit. Mr.Unnikrishnan has been unable to inform me as to whether any application for regularisation has been made after this Court’s order dated 24th March 2009. 3. However, he prays for one last opportunity to avail of the benefit of this 3 Court’s order dated 24th March 2009 and states that within two weeks from today the petitioner will apply for regularisation of the subject construction/ work. If such an application is made, Corporation should dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law, so also, communicate the order to the petitioner in that behalf. 4. It is based upon the statement made by Mr.Unnikrishnan, after taking instructions from his client and that petitioner agreeing to withdraw the proceedings in the trial court, that I propose to pass the following order:- (a) The order under challenge is quashed and set aside. Suit No.1170 of 2004 is restored to the file of trial court but Mr.Unnikrishnan states that within one week from today, the said suit will be withdrawn. If an application for 4 withdrawal is made, the trial court shall permit withdrawal of the suit and it is needless to state that if no such application is made, the suit shall stand dismissed for want of prosecution under the impugned order. (b) Petitioner’s structure not to be demolished, if not already demolished for a period of four weeks from today and within a period of two weeks, he shall apply for regularisation of the same and if such an application is made, it shall be decided within the stipulated period of four weeks. Needless to state that if no application is made, this structure can be demolished by the Corporation. (c) Petition disposed of. No costs. 5 (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)