ssp 1 WP(L) 2865 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO.2865 of 2011 Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association (AHAR) .....Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ..... Respondents Ms.Veena Thadani with Mr.Vishal Thadani, for the petitioner Ms.Uma Palsule-Desai, AGP, for the respondents CORAM: P.B.MAJMUDAR & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATE: 23rd DECEMBER, 2011. P.C. : 1. By way of the above petition, the petitioner have prayed that they may be allowed to operate their respective hotels and restaurants in the City of Mumbai and Suburban District upto 5.00 a.m. on 25th December, 2011 as well as on 1st January, 2012. It is the say of the petitioners that they should be allowed to continue their hotels/restaurants activities for whole night beginning from the evening of 24th December, 2011, upto the morning of 25th December, 2011 and from the evening of 31st December, 2011, upto the morning of 1st January, 2012. 2. During the course of hearing, counsel appearing for the petitioners has placed on record a communication dated 20th December, 2011 addressed by the Deputy Secretary, Home Department, State of Maharashtra to the Commissioner, State Excise Department, Maharashtra, ssp 2 WP(L) 2865 of 2011 pointing out that on the aforesaid dates, in the specified areas, some hotels and restaurants may be allowed to operate upto 1.00 a.m. and and some hotels/restaurants may be allowed to operate upto 5.00 a.m. 3. Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that in view of the directions given by the State Government, nothing further survives in the matter. Whether on a particular date, hotels/restaurants should be allowed to continue upto 1.00 a.m. or upto 5.00 a.m., is in the realm of the State Government and this Court in a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot give any directions as upto what time hotels/restaurants should be continued, except that if there is any notification or decision, the same is to be followed. The above letter/ communication dated 20th December, 2011 is taken on record and marked as Exh.’X’ for identification. Suffice it to say that no interference of this Court is called for in its extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that she is not pressing any other point. 4. In view of the said communication of the State Government, nothing further requires to be done in the matter and the writ petition is disposed in view of what is stated above. ( MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )