IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.269 OF 2010 Sujata Chandrakant Patil ...Appellant. v. M.C.G.M. ...Respondents. Mr.A.M.Saraogi, adv. For the Appellant. Smt. K.K.Soran, adv. For the Respondent/B.M.C. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : MARCH 25, 2010 P.C. 1 The learned counsel for the appellant points out that notice dated 5.1.2010 was issued by the Municipal Corporation to the appellant under Section 354A to stop the construction work of 7 rooms. According to him, on 8th January, 2010, the appellant has replied the said notice stating that no construction is going on and that for number of years, he is in occupation of the premises. The learned counsel contends that even though in that reply, appellant has not stated that he has got the permission for construction or that the construction is protected as the construction is not going on, the notice under Section 354A is not tenable . The learned counsel only wants that Municipal Corporation should consider his reply and he is willing to withdraw the appeal as well as the suit filed by him. - 2 - 2 In view of the above circumstances and the statement , appeal as well as application stand disposed off as withdrawn with the direction to the respondents to consider the reply dated 8th January, 2010 and to take appropriate decision within four weeks from this date and till the decision is taken, notice shall not be acted upon. In case the construction is already completed and notice under Section 354A cannot be issued, the Municipal Corporation still shall be at liberty to issue notice under any other provisions of law if the construction is found to be unauthorised or illegal. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)