1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1671 OF 2008 Sun-N-Sand Hotel Pvt. Ltd. .... Petitioner V/s. Union of India & Ors. ..... Respondents Mr.Suben Behram Kamdin a/w Ms.Meghavi Malvia & Sandeep Bhimekar i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co., for the Petitioner. Mr.R.V.Desai, Sr.Counsel a/w H.V.Mehta & P.Khosla i/b Dr.T.C.Kaushik, for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2. CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR & A.A.SAYED, JJ. DATED : JULY 31, 2008. P.C. 1. By filing this petition, the petitioner which is a Limited company, has prayed that respondent No.2 may be directed to give inspection of the documents referred to in the Show Cause Notice (Exh.G) dated 24-03- 2008. The respondents have initiated proceedings against the petitioner under the Public Premises Eviction Act, and the show cause notice has been issued against the petitioner in this behalf. The proceedings are still pending with the authority and at an interlocutory stage, the petitioner approached this Court with a prayer that respondent No.2 may be directed 2 to give inspection of documents to the petitioner in order to show whether the land in question is public premises or government land. 2. The learned counsel Mr.Desai appearing for the respondent Nos.1 & 2 has submitted that this petition is not required to be entertained as the same has been filed at an interlocutory stage. It is submitted that in view of the pendency of this petition, the proceedings before the authority are delayed. 3. We find substance in the argument of learned Advocate for respondent Nos.1 & 2. This Court would not like to interfere with the pending proceedings at this stage. However, we direct the respondent Nos.1 & 2 to give inspection of documents to the petitioner and such inspection be given during the office hours and the petitioner is permitted to make note of inspection of such documents. 4. The learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 & 2 further submitted that the copies of all the documents have already been given to the petitioner, however, the respondent Nos.1 & 2 are willing to give inspection to the petitioner and respondents are ready to give again same bunch of papers to the petitioner. 5. Considering the aforesaid statement, in our view, this petition is not required to be entertained at an interlocutory stage. Liberty is granted 3 to the petitioner to inspect the documents during the working hours of respondent Nos.1 & 2. The petitioner shall inspect the documents on any working day within a period of two weeks from today. It will be open to the petitioner to defend the show cause notice in the pending proceedings on all available points. After taking such inspection, if the petitioner wants copy of any of the documents, the respondents may give to the petitioner at the cost of the petitioner. Subject to what is stated above, the petition is not required to be entertained as the same has been filed at an interlocutory stage. The petition accordingly stands disposed of subject to what is stated above. ( A.A.SAYED, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )