IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION (1) P.I.L. No.171 of 2006 with (2) P.I.L. No. 172 of 2006 Maj.(Retd) Shankar Sudama Khandekar & Ors. ..Petitioners vs. 1. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr.R.P.Sabban for petitioners. Mr.V.P.Malvankar, A.G.P. for respondent no.1 Mr.V.B.Naik i/b M/s Naik, Naik Iyer and Co. for respondent nos. 2 and 3 CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR C.J. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR C.J. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR C.J. & S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. & S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. & S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J. 26th April, 2007 26th April, 2007 26th April, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submit that treating these writ petitions as representations to the authorities and after calling for the report from the Corporation, the Competent Authority in the Government shall take a decision keeping in view section 451 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act,1949. It is further stated that they would consider the same and the order so passed shall be communicated to the petitioner. In view of the statement made the Counsel for the petitioner does not press these petitions at this stage. Leave is granted to withdraw these petitions with liberty to approach the Court again if the order is adverse to the interest of the petitioner. 2. Petitions are accordingly disposed of. ( CHIEF JUSTICE ) ( CHIEF JUSTICE ) ( CHIEF JUSTICE ) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI J.)