1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8388 OF 2010 Nanded Treasure Bazzar Pvt. Ltd., through its Director, Nilesh s/o Sureshbhai Thakkar ...Petitioner VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others ...Respondents ..... Shri S.B.Talekar, advocate for the petitioner Shri V.D.Godbharle, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2 Shri M.V.Deshpande, advocate for respondent nos. 3 and 4. ..... CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, JJ. DATED : 21 st December, 2010 PER COURT : 1 We have extensively heard this petition at admission stage. 2 Perused the record placed before us, the relevant Regulations, provisions of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 and the building plan. We have also perused the affidavit 2 in reply filed by the Corporation. We have heard the submissions advanced by Shri M.V. Deshpande, learned counsel for the Corporation. 3 The learned counsel Shri Talekar, on instructions of the petitioner, seeks withdrawal of the petition, as the petitioner proposes to submit alternate proposal with the Corporation in respect of the subject project and in respect of grant of additional F.S.I. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the proposal would be submitted within four weeks from today. In case, such a proposal is submitted, the learned counsel Shri M.V.Deshpande submits, on instructions, that the Corporation will pass appropriate orders on the said proposal in accordance with law and communicate the same to the petitioner at the earliest. 4 We clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the issue raised in the petition. 5 Leave is granted to withdraw this petition, with liberty to approach this court as and when cause of action arises. 6 The petition is disposed of. 3 7 Authentic copy is permitted to the parties on their request as per usual procedure. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (NARESH H.PATIL, J.) dbm/wp8388.10