IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4763 OF 2009 M/s Mayur Corporation ..Petitioner versus The Pune Municipal Corporation & Anr. ..Respondents Mr. G.S. Godbole for Petitioners Mr. Rajdeep S. Khadapkar for Respondent No. 1 Mr. S.N. Bhosale, AGP for Respondent No. 2 CORAM : D. D. SINHA & A. A. SAYED , JJ. DATED : MARCH, 05, 2010. P.C. 1 Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned AGP for the State. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that the land of the petitioner as per the final development plan of 1987 was reserved for primary school and garden. The petitioner has started primary school on the part of the land, which was reserved for the said purpose. It is further contended that the State Government passed an order under section 37(1) of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act 1966 for carrying out minor modification in the final development plan 1987, however failed to take any steps thereafter. Hence, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for necessary direction to the State Government in this regard. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this Court vide order dated 17th February, 2010 directed the learned AGP to seek instructions in this regard and file additional affidavit. Pursuant to the said direction Sadhana Pradeep Naik, Deputy Director of Town Planning, Pune Division, Pune filed additional affidavit on behalf oft respondent No.2 dated 2nd March, 2010 and in the last paragraph of the affidavit it is observed thus:- " I further say that, as per the provisions of this section now Government shall initiate the necessary legal proceeding under section 37-1(A) to issue notice of modification as per the directive of State Government dated 30th September, 1999. And thereafter completion of proceeding as per Section 37 (1) the State Government shall take appropriate final decision as per law." 2 The learned Counsel for the petitioner states that in view of the above referred statement made in the affidavit, the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed however, prayed that the State Government may be asked to complete the process/ proceeding within the stipulated period. 3 In the backdrop of the above referred fact, since the grievance of the petitioner in view of the statement made in the affidavit filed by respondent No.2 stands redressed, we dispose of the petition and expect the State Government to complete the proceeding under section 37(1) (a) of the MRTP Act within a period of 6 months from the issuance of the date of notice. The learned AGP states that notice will be issued within a period of 4 weeks from today. Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (D. D. SINHA, J.) ( A. A. SAYED, J.)