1 wp10065-10 dmt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10065 OF 2010 Satish V. Risbud. ... Petitioner. V/s. District Collector, Thane & Ors. ... Respondents. Mr. Sham Walve i/by D.K. Ghaisas for petitioner. Ms. M.P. Thakur, AGP for respondents. CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR & A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATE : 11th MARCH, 2011 P.C. By way of this petition the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the State of Maharashtra, Urban Development Department dated 18.10.2007 by which the permission granted to the original owner for implementing the scheme under Section 20 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 has been cancelled. In our view, the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the said order as the development agreement given by the original owner to the petitioner is already cancelled and the petitioner has challenged the same by way of filing a civil suit. In our view, the petitioner has no right, title or interest in the suit property in view of the cancellation of the said development agreement. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the order is contrary to law, he has filed this writ petition. In our opinion, since the petitioner has no right, title or interest in the suit property, he cannot challenge the said order which 2 wp10065-10 is passed as far back as in 2007 at such a belated stage. Hence, the writ petition cannot be entertained. 3. In view of what is stated above, the writ petition stands rejected. (A.A.SAYED, J.) (P.B.MAJMUDAR, J.)