1` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR W.P.No.4045/2007 Umesh Dayashankar Choube vs. State of Maharashtra, and others. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri S.C.Mehadia, amicus curaie for the petitioner. Mrs. B.H.Dangre, Addl. G. P. for respondents 1 and 2. Mr. R.O.Chhabra, Advocate for respondent no.3. Mr. Sadavarte, Advocate for respondent no. 4. Mr. S.M. Puranik, Advocate for respondent no.5. Mr. S.J.Khandalkar, Adv. for intervenor. CORAM : B.H.MARLAPALLE & A.H.JOSHI, JJ DATE : 3.12.2008 Heard Mr. S.C. Mehadia, the learned amicus curiae appointed by this court. 2. The letter dated 21.4.2007 received from Umesh Dayashankar Choube a social worker and reporter has been converted into the Public Interest Litigation in the form of this writ petition and the only grievance raised was for providing the protection wall around the Maharaj Bag Garden. The respondent no.5- the Municipal Corporation, in its affidavit has stated that the proposal formulated by the Executive Engineer on 4.8.2008 was 2` considered and the Standing Committee in its resolution dated 11.8.2008, has approved the said proposal providing for an outlay of about Rs. 1 crore to construct a wall along with the Nala that passes through the Maharaj Bag Garden. In our order dated 12.11.2008 we have noted that out of the said amount of Rs. 1 crore to be spent for construction of the wall, the contribution of the Respondent no.5 Corporation is to the extent of Rs. 40 lacs and the balance amount of Rs. 60 lacs has to come from the State Government by way of its contribution and on 19.11.2008. Mrs. Dangre, the learned Addl. Government Pleader placed before us a copy of the Government Resolution dated 29.8.2008 and as per the same the respondent Corporation has to submit its proposal to the Committee constituted by the State Government and if the Committee accepts the proposal, the Government will take steps for providing special budget allocation. Mr. Puranik, the learned counsel for the respondent Corporation states that the Corporation will submit a proposal to the local committee constituted by the State Government in the next meeting and the 3` construction would commence at the earliest possible. We hope and expect that the construction which is in progress as of now is completed as per the schedule set out in the additional affidavit in reply filed on 4.9.2008. We have noted down the said undertaking in the additional affidavit of respondent no.5 Corporation. 3. The petition is disposed off accordingly. JUDGE JUDGE patle 4`