IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 400 OF 2005 SHRI RAVI HUNSHAL, PANAJI GOA ....Petitioner Versus CORPORATION OF CITY OF PANAJI ....Respondents THROUGH ITS COMMISSIONER AND ANR., Mrs. A. Agni,Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. V. P. Thali, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 Coram:- R. M. LODHA & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:- 24th October, 2005 P.C.: During the course of motion hearing, Mr. V.P. Thali, the learned counsel for the Respondent No.1 made two statements: (i) That the petitioner continues to carry on his business in the temporarily allotted Shed No.2 situated Opposite Kamat Center, Municipal Market, Panaji; and (ii) That the Respondent No.1 shall not pass any order for removal of the petitioner from Shed No.2 situated opposite Kamat Center, Municipal Market, Panaji without hearing the petitioner. 2. In the light of the statement made by the learned counsel for the Respondent No.1, we are satisfied that the Writ Petition does not deserve to be entertained and it is disposed of by the following Order :- (i) The respondent No.1 shall issue notice to the petitioner before he is asked to remove from Shed No.2 situated opposite Kamat Center, Municipal Market, Panaji. (ii) It will be open to the petitioner to raise all available contentions in response to the notice that may be issued to him by the respondent No.1. Order accordingly. R. M. LODHA, J. N. A. BRITTO, J. sl.