1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2397 OF 2009 Tareque s/o Aziz Farooqui .vs. The State of Maharashtra & others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. R.J. Mirza, Advocate for petitioner, Mrs. K.R. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 to 3, Mr. M.I. Dhatrak, Advocate for respondent no. 4, Mr. A.P. Tathod, Advocate for respondent nos. 5 & 6, Mr. P.C. Madkholkar, Advocate for respondent nos. 7 to 10. Mr. M.R. Joharapurkar, Advocate for intervenor. CORAM : S.A. BOBDE & M.N. GILANI, JJ. DATED : SEPTEMBER 7, 2011. Mr. P.C. Madkholkar, learned Advocate for respondent nos. 7 to 10, states that respondent nos. 7 to 10 are carrying on business in premises in respect of which the State Government has not turned down the prayer for minor modification. It is further not disputed that the respondent nos. 7 to 10 have been carrying on business in the said premises for the past 8 years. Having regard to this fact and the fact that the proposal for minor modification has not yet been decided, we consider it appropriate to permit the respondent nos. 7 to 10 to carry on their business in the said premises pending further orders. 2 C.A.W. NO. 2298 OF 2011 : C.A. for intervention is allowed. Mr. M.R. Joharapurkar, learned Advocate for intervenor/ applicant, states that seal has been put on the premises even though she was not carrying on any commercial activity in the said premises. This fact is not disputed. Having regard to the further statement that the applicant will use the premises only for industrial purposes and subject to furnishing of undertaking to that effect, we direct the Municipal Council to unseal the premises. Order accordingly. The State Government shall decide the proposal pertaining to minor modification within a period of eight weeks from today. Judge Judge J.