IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (St.) NO.26 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1362 OF 2008 Suresh R. Dubey and Ors. ...Petitioners. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors and Virendra Kashipal and Ors. ...Respondents. Mr.M.A.Abdi i/by ABDI & Co. adv. For the petitioners. Mr.G.W.Mattos , AGP For the Respondent/State. Mr.Y.M.Chaudhary a/w Mr.Kunal Cheema, advs. for the Respondent Nos.1 to 8 and 10. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATED : MARCH 9, 2010 P.C. 1 We have heard the learned counsel for the review applicants. In so far as their right in the new building is concerned, both MHADA and the developer have assured the Court that the review applicants would be rehabilitated. Statement made on behalf of the MHADA and developer accepted. 2 The learned counsel on behalf of the MHADA further states that until such time as persons entitled to accommodation are allotted premises, they would not give OC for the saleable component of the premises. - 2- 3 Further the petitioner and the developer within a period of two weeks, then to enter into an agreement in the format as prescribed by the MHADA. 4 We have perused the order of this Court including the judgment passed on 19th June, 2008 which is the subject matter of the present review application. Considering the findings recorded by this Court , in our opinion, the only relief we can grant is to direct the developer to provide alternate transit accommodation to the review applicants in the transit accommodation at Gorai, which is already provided. Review applicants to contact the developer, who then will hand over the possession of the transit accommodation in favour of the review applicants. 5 With the above observations, review petition stands disposed off. (J.H. BHATIA,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)