1 NMW-74/10 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.74 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2418 OF 2009 Pradip Shivhar Shinde : Petitioner versus Chief Officer, MHADA and ors. : Respondents. Mr.A A Kumbhakoni i/by Mr.Ashutosh M Kulkarni for the Petitioner. Mr. G W Mattos for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Mr. Ajay Basutkar for Respondent No.5. Ms. Ankita Singhania i/by D H Law Associates for Respondent No.6. CORAM : P B MAJMUDAR & R M SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 07th September 2011 P.C. 1 By way of this Notice of Motion, the Petitioner prays that pending the hearing and final disposal of the present writ petition, the Respondent Nos.5 and 6 may be restrained from erecting any additional mobile towers as well as the signal receiving instruments, as according to the Petitioner, it creates great inconvenience to the Petitioner as the same is erected on the terrace of the building and the some part thereof is fixed to the outer wall of the Petitioner’s flat which is on the top floor. 2 The MHADA has filed affidavit in reply of Dilip Dhondu Garje, Executive Engineer of MHADA wherein it is stated in Para 4 as under :- “In the premises aforementioned, my office would within a period of 2 weeks from the date hereof call upon the Respondent Nos.5 and 6 to remove the said mobile tower and the transformer/substation within a period of 7 days from the receipt thereof, failing which the same 2 NMW-74/10 would be removed by my office under Police protection and the costs thereof that shall be recovered as arrears of Land Revenue from the Respondent No.5 Society or the Respondent No.6.” In view of the stand taken by the MHADA in the said affidavit in reply, nothing is required to be done in connection with the prayers made by the Petitioner in the Notice of Motion as well as in the Writ Petition. 3 The learned counsel appearing for the MHADA Shri Mattos states that they have already issued notice to the society as well as the Respondent No.6 for removing the mobile towers and the accessories thereto. It is submitted by Shri Mattos that MHADA will act in accordance with the affidavit in reply filed herein within a period of two weeks from date. 4 The learned counsel for the Respondent No.6 states that Respondent No.6 will take out appropriate proceedings against the decision of the MHADA. We are not expressing any opinion on this aspect. 4 The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner Shri Kumbhakoni fairly states that in view of the stand taken by the MHADA, nothing survives in the Notice of Motion as well as the Writ Petition. Accordingly the above Notice of Motion and the Writ Petition No.2418 of 2009 is disposed of. [R.M.SAVANT, J] [P.B.MAJMUDAR, J]