1 LPA.102-2011 acd IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 102 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4377 OF 2010 Fakir Mohd. Ali Hasan & Ors. ... Appellants. Vs. Assistant Municipal Commissioner “E” Ward, Mumbai & Ors. ....Respondents. --- Mr. P.K. Dhakephalkar, Sr. Advocate i/b A.D. Parab, for the appellants. Mr. A.Y. Sakhare, Sr. Advocate with Mr. R.A. Malandkar, for respondent no.1. Mr. R.A. Lokhande i/b D.A. Nalawade for respondent no.2. Ms. P.S. Cardozo, AGP for respondent no.3. Mr. S.U. Kamdar, Sr. Advocate with D.F. Sharma i/b Dharam & Co., for respondent nos.4. Mr. R.D. Soni i/b Ms. Uma Sharma, for respondent no.5. CORAM: D.B. BHOSALE & U.D. SALVI, JJ. MAY 03, 2011. P.C.: 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties 2. Mr. Dhakephalkar, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants, 2 LPA.102-2011 on instructions from the Advocate on record, does not press the appeal and submits that the appellants intend to file an application for appropriate reliefs before the High Power Committee in the Application No.3 of 2011 filed by Narialwadi Zopadpatti Welfare Society. 3. In view of the statement made by Mr. Dhakephalkar, this appeal is disposed of as not pressed. If the appellants file any application, as aforementioned, before the High Power Committee, same may be considered on merits in accordance with law. 4. All contentions of the parties including the contention of the respondents regarding maintainability of the application, that the appellants propose to file, are kept open. 5. Mr. Kamdar, learned Senior Counsel, on instructions from respondent no.4, makes a statement that respondent no.4 shall not move the concerned authority for eviction of the appellants in pursuance of the impugned order for a period of two weeks from today. The statement is accepted. In view of the statement made by Mr. Kamdar, we hope and trust that the concerned authority shall not evict the appellants for a period of 3 LPA.102-2011 two weeks from today. 6. With these observations, the appeal is disposed of. It is made clear that we have not examined merits of the case. (U. D. SALVI,J.) (D.B. BHOSALE,J)