1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6484 OF 2005 Rajanna Kotayya Mothkuri & Ors. ..Petitioners. Vs. Slum Rehabilitation Authority & anr. ..Respondents. .... Mr.V.A.Thorat, Senior Advocate with Mrs.S.S.Donde for the Petitioners. Mr.G.D.Utangale for Respondent No.1. Mr.V.M.Vaghela for Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, AGP for Respondent No.5. .... CORAM : CORAM : CORAM : F.I.REBELLO & F.I.REBELLO & F.I.REBELLO & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, JJ. JJ. JJ. 25th October, 2005. P.C. : 1. Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. In the instant case, one Shri Ganesh 2 Co-operative Housing Society (Proposed) had preferred an appeal before the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Special Tribunal being Miscellaneous Application 26 of 2005. That application was disposed of by order dated 22nd June, 2005 and various directions were issued. These directions were to the Chief Executive Officer of Respondent No.1. It appears that in the meantime, another society came to be registered which was initially known as Balaji Co-operative Housing Society (Proposed) and subsequently, known as Shri Tirupati Balaji Co-operative Housing Society Limited. The grievance of the Petitioners is that they are eligible and as such they had approached to the Chief Executive Officer of Respondent No.1 in terms of the order passed on the application by the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Special Tribunal, Mumbai. 3. At the hearing of this Petition, on behalf of Respondent No.1, on taking instructions, learned counsel makes a statement that the representation received in terms of the directions in the order dated 22nd June, 2005 will be heard and disposed of 3 within eight weeks from today. 4. On behalf of Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 learned counsel has sought to raise various objections. From the order dated 22nd June, 2005 we have noted that the said Respondents will also be heard before Respondent No.1 passes orders. Considering the above, statement made on behalf of Respondent No.1 is accepted. Respondent No.1 is directed to dispose of the application/ objections in terms of the order dated 22nd June, 2005 within eight weeks from today. Rule made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.)