WPL.268/2010 acd IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (LODG) NO. 268 OF 2010 Bapu Narayan Romane ...Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors ...Respondents. ---- Mr. Pradeep J. Thorat, for the Petitioner. Ms. I. Culcuttawala, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 5. Ms. Nutan Moily, for Respondent No.4. ---- CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. AND S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 19th JULY, 2010. P.C. 1] We need not go into the controversy as to whether the petitioner who was the Chief Promoter at the relevant time submitted a list of 14 persons who were held to be allegedly eligible, but the society refused to accept them to be so. 2] The petitioner’s case in his application before the High Powered Committee was that complete records and proceedings 1 WPL.268/2010 including annexures from LOI etc. be called for and the issue of eligibility of 14 persons whose names are mentioned the application to the Slum Rehabilitation Authority with flat members be gone into and decided afresh. We have gone into it and necessary action taken to set aside the orders made in their favour in that behalf. 3] By the impugned order, the High Powered Committee directed the Slum Rehabilitation Authority to take necessary action. Merely because the order of the High Powered Committee directs the Authority to take action against the committee members of the society does not mean that the Authority will take necessary steps and measures without proper inquiry and hearing all the affected parties. 4] Since it is stated on behalf of Slum Rehabilitation Authority that necessary action would be taken in pursuance of the order of the High Powered Committee within four weeks from today, this petition need not be entertained. Petition is accordingly disposed of. Needless to clarify that we have not gone into the merits of the controversy between the parties. CHIEF JUSTICE S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. 2