1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2186 OF 2010 Suresh Vasantrao Naladkar, Age 58 years, Occu.Business & Agri., R/o Nagreshwar Galli, Main road, Gangakhed, Taluka Gangakhed, District Parbhani .. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Parbhani, District Parbhani 2. The Municipal Council, Gangakhed, Through the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Gangakhed, Taluka Gangakhed, District Parbhani .. RESPONDENTS Mr.Mukul Kulkarni, Advocate holding for Mr.S.V.Mundhe, Advocate for petitioner Mrs.A.V.Godhamgaonkar, Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondent No.1 Mr.Subhash V.Munde, Advocate for respondent No.2 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ DATE : 22nd June 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2 2. At the outset, Mr.Mukul Kulkarni, learned Counsel for the petitioner states that though the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ directing the respondents to grant permission to the petitioner, the petitioner does not press for the relief at prayer clause (B) and (D) to the petition. The petitioner would restrict the relief insofar as the prayer at prayer clause (C) is concerned, i.e. to direct the respondent to decide the application submitted by the petitioner seeking permission for construction. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that liberty may be granted to the petitioner to urge the reliefs at prayer clauses (B) and (D) in the event adverse orders are passed by the respondents on the application submitted by the petitioner. We, accordingly, dismiss this petition insofar as it relates to the relief sought for at prayer clause (B) and (D) are concerned and grant liberty as prayed for. 3. The limited relief, therefore, which the petitioner now seeks is to direct the respondents to decide the application submitted by the petitioner seeking permission for construction in respect of the property bearing House No.47/3/1, situated at Dastgir Mohalla, Gangakhed, District Parbhani. We have heard Mr.Mukul Kulkarni, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mr.S.V.Munde, learned Counsel on behalf of respondent No.2. 3 Learned Counsel for respondent No.2 states on instructions that if the application is pending, the same would be decided by respondent No.2, in accordance with law, within period of six weeks. 4. We, accordingly, allow this writ petition and direct the respondent No.2 to decide the application submitted by the petitioner seeking building permission, if pending, within six weeks from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. 5. Rule made absolute on the above terms with no orders as to costs. ( N.D.DESHPANDE ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/2186.10wp)