.[1]. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1169 OF 2006 Suresh Shantaram Kocharekar ...Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr.Usha Purohit, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.G.W.Mattos, A.G.P., for the Respondents. .... CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND F.I.REBELLO AND F.I.REBELLO AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATED : JULY 11, 2006. JULY 11, 2006. JULY 11, 2006. P.C.: . On behalf of Respondent Nos.2 & 3 the learned Counsel makes a statement that the work orders have been issued and the work is likely to commence some time in next month. The time for completion of work is two years. Considering that, in our opinion no case as made out can be considered in the present petition. 2. On behalf of the petitioner, however, the learned Counsel makes a statement that he will give up his claim if the Respondent should consider him against available flat elsewhere. It would be open to the petitioner to send a .[2]. representation to Respondents. On receipt of such representation the Respondents to dispose of the same in accordance with law. With the above observation petition stands disposed of. [F.I.REBELLO,J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]