hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1925 OF 2010 Kalam Adam Yete ... Petitioner Versus M.H.A.D.A. ... Respondent Ms. Prachi Khandge with Mr. Makaranad Kale i/by M/s. M.P. Vashi & Associates for petitioner. Mr. D.A. Nalawade, G.P. For Respondent. CORAM : P.B. MAJMUDAR & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATED : DECEMBER 02, , 2011 P.C. It is pointed out by the learned Government Pleader Mr. Nalawade that against the impugned order, an appeal is maintainable under Regulation 18(4) of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development (Estate Management, Sale, Transfer and Exchange of Tenements) Regulations, 1981 before the Chief Executive Officer. Considering the fact that the petitioner has alternative remedy available, we are not entertaining this petition. It is however, pointed out that the period of limitation is over. In case the petitioner prefers an appeal before the competent authority i.e. the Chief Executive Officer, within two weeks from today, the competent authority shall dispose of the same within three months from the date of its receipt, as stipulated under the said Regulations, on its own merits, without adhering to the period of limitation. With the above observations, petition stands disposed of. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) (P.B. MAJMUDAR,J)