1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5916 OF 1998 Dashrath Pandurang Joshi & Ors. ... ... Petitioners. Versus The Municipal Corporation of the City of Kalyan &Dombivli and Ors. ... ... Respondents. Mr. M. V. Limaye for the Petitioners. Mr. A. S. Rao for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM : D. D. SINHA and A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 1ST FEBRUARY, 2010. P. C.: Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties. 2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 29th October, 1998 passed by respondent No.3 whereby the building permission granted in favour of the petitioners came to be revoked. 3. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Counsel for respondent No.3 that the final development plan for Kalyan-Dombivli Municipal Corporation was published vide Notification dated 14th September, 2009 and as per the said Notification the Government has taken the decision to exclude the area under existing authorised structure from reservation. The concerned land 2 owners were to submit proof showing that the structures mentioned in E.P. No. is authorised within one year from the date of the said Notification. It is further contended that after verification of the documents submitted by the land owners and after making necessary inquiry if the Government found that the structure is authorised then the area under such authorised structures will be dereserved as per Schedule mentioned in the said Notification. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in view of the Notification dated 14th September, 2009, the petitioners have submitted application dated 6th January, 2010 to respondent No.3 along with necessary documentary evidence in order to show the proof of the structure mentioned in E.P. No. Learned Counsel for respondent No.3 has submitted that the application and the documents submitted by the petitioners shall be considered, scrutinised and will be forwarded to the State Government for passing necessary orders, accordingly, within the reasonable time. 5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that if this Court intends to dispose off the writ petition in view of the above referred facts, in that case, he prays that the interim order dated 15th March, 1999 may kindly be continued till the final decision is taken by the State Government on the application of the petitioners dated 6th January, 2010. It is also prayed that if the order of the State Government is adverse to the petitioners, liberty may be given to the petitioners to challenge the same. 6. In the backdrop of the above referred fact, we do not want to keep the writ 3 petition pending since the decision in the changed circumstances is required to be taken by the State Government. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, accordingly. 7. The interim order dated 15th March, 1999 shall continue to operate till the final decision is taken by the State Government in accordance with the law and procedure applicable in this regard on the application of the petitioners dated 6th January, 2010 submitted pursuant to the Notification dated 14th September, 2009 and shall cease to operate automatically thereafter. 8. We expect the State Government to communicate the final order to the petitioners and if the order of the State Government is adverse to the petitioners, the petitioners will be at liberty to challenge the same before the appropriate Court. Sd/- (D. D. SINHA, J.) Sd/- (A. A. SAYED, J.)