(-1-) MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1760 OF 2008 M/s.Atul Builders & Estate Ltd... Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors....Respondents Mr. Roop M. Vasudeo, for the Petitioner. Mr. Shekhar Ingawale, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mrs. A.K. Savala, for the Respondent No.4. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & R.S.MOHITE, JJ. R.S.MOHITE, JJ. R.S.MOHITE, JJ. DATED: 19th December, 2008 DATED: 19th December, 2008 DATED: 19th December, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. The petitioner had approached this Court praying that the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 may be directed to demolish the unauthorised Police Chowki with Beat Office No.2 of Respondent No.2 situated at Subhash Nagar Road. 3. From the facts on record it is clear that the Chowki has been constructed on the D.P. Road. 4. Mr. K.M.M. Prasanna, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone 10 has filed an affidavit. In the said affidavit the reason why the Chowki was (-2-) constructed was set out. For the purpose of this petition, what is relevant is para.3 of the affidavit which we hereinafter reproduce as under:- "3. I say that it will take sometime for this office to re-locate the Police Chowkie from the present place to some other suitable place where the said Police Chowkie can be shifted and, therefore, I request the Hon’ble Court to grant a period of one year within which period this office will relocate the Police Chowkie from the present place. 5. Considering what is set out in para.3 of the affidavit in our opinion, the plea for time as sought for on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 is genuine and, therefore, we accept the affidavit/undertaking filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 6. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 is give one year’s time from today to relocate the Police Chowkie from the present place. 7. We make it clear that relocation of the Police Chowki would mean removal of the Chowki. (-3-) 8. On such removal Respondent Corporation to consider the plea of the petitioners for additional F.S.I. 9. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)