1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIGINAL SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.2355 OF 2009 M/s. Tolaram & Company & Anr. .... Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .... Respondents Shri D.D. Madon, Senior Advocate with Ms Anuksha Sharda i/b DSK Legal for the Petitioners. Ms Uma Palsure Desai, AGP, for Respondent No.1. Ms V.S. Gharpure for Respondent Nos.2 to 4. S/Shri Rigved Sawant i/b Anil Menon for Respondent No.5. CORAM: J.N. PATEL AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATED: APRIL 05, 2010 P.C: The learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation states that save and except the room in respect of which rights are claimed by respondent No.5, the rest of the building will be demolished and even the water connection to the building has been cut-off. The learned counsel, after taking instructions 2 from Shri P.B. Kathade, Sub-Engineer (B&F), S- Ward, Mumbai, who is present in the Court, further states that the petitioners are already served with the notice to demolish the building, subject to rights of respondent No.5. The copy of the notice tendered in the Court is taken on the record and is marked as X for identification. In view of the above statement, nothing survives in the petition and the same is disposed of. Sd/- J.N. PATEL, J. Sd/- A.P. BHANGALE, J. Mentioned. Date: 6th April, 2010. The learned counsel for respondent No.5 states that the petitioners should not act upon the notice for a period of two weeks to enable respondent No.5 to approach the Supreme Court. The counsel for the petitioners states that Court may pass appropriate order. We, therefore, direct the petitioners not to act on the notice for two weeks from today. Sd/- J.N. PATEL, J. Sd/- A.P. BHANGALE, J.