1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 1007/2008 (Sudarshan Sadashivrao Barapatre VERSUS Nagpur Improvement Trust thro. its Chairman) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. S.P. Kshirsagar, counsel for the petitioner. CORAM : D.D.SINHA AND SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, JJ. DATE : MARCH 5, 2008. Heard. Notice. Mr. Sambre, the learned counsel, waives notice on behalf of the Nagpur Improvement Trust. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that in the instant petition, the petitioner is challenging the communication/order dated 11.02.2008 passed by the Executive Officer, Nagpur Improvement Trust, whereby the allotment of quarter made in favour of the petitioner came to be cancelled on the ground that the annual income of the petitioner is more than Rs.54,000/-. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there are other four persons namely Mr. S.B. Zode, Mr. Deshpande, Mr. Ravindra Chudaman Gundalwar and Mr. Ajay Samarth who are identically circumstanced and to whom quarters were allotted under the Nandanvan Gharkul Scheme, their 2 allotments were cancelled by the Nagpur Improvement Trust for the same reason. However, at the later point of time, the allotments were restored after imposing fine. The learned counsel for the petitioner, in such situation, seeks permission to withdraw the present writ petition with liberty to file a representation to the Nagpur Improvement Trust against the impugned order dated 11.02.2008 within four days from today and prays that the Nagpur Improvement Trust be directed to decide the same on its own merit. In the backdrop of the above referred facts, we dispose of the petition as withdrawn with liberty to file a representation against the impugned order dated 11.02.2008 to the Nagpur Improvement Trust within a period of four days. If such representation is made, we direct the Nagpur Improvement Trust to decide the same afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from the date of communication of this order. The counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, prays that till the decision is taken by the Nagpur Improvement Trust, parties may be directed to maintain status quo otherwise it will cause irreparable loss to the petitioner. 3 We direct the parties to maintain status quo for a period of three weeks. Needless to mention that the impugned order shall not come in the way of reconsideration of the issue by the Nagpur Improvement Trust on the basis of the representation made by the petitioner afresh, however, if the representation is rejected the impugned order automatically will come into operation. JUDGE JUDGE APTE