1 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3870 OF 2009 M/s.Ashish Gandhi Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. Through its Director : Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra & ors. : Respondents. Mr.Anilkumar Patil for the Petitioner. Mr. Vinay Masurkar, GP, for the Respondent No.1. Mr. G W Mattos, AGP, for Respondent Nos.2 to 4. Mr B A Walimbe for Respondent Nos.5 and 6. CORAM : S B MHASE & R M SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 21st July 2009 P.C. 1. The learned counsel for the MHADA states that the orders of allotment in respect of Plot No.C-24 are being withdrawn even though they may be either in favour of the Petitioner or in favour of the Respondent Nos.5 and 6 and, the Chief Officer, who is present in Court, states that the MHADA will re-advertise the plot and only after the offer pursuant to the said advertisement is accepted that allotment in respect of the said plot would be made. The Petitioner has not objection for the said cause of action being followed. 2 2. In view of the controversy involved in the above Petition and in view of the past history of litigations between the parties, we find that the stand taken by the MHADA Officer is correct and reasonable in the facts and circumstances of the case. When a fresh advertisement is published, the Petitioner and Respondents both can participate in that process and can give their offers. In the said process the MHADA also stands to get the proper price for the plot in question. The amounts which have been paid by the Petitioner and the Respondent Nos.5 and 6 shall be refunded to them and in case, they participate in the fresh bids that would be invited, they would have to make deposit and payment as per the rules and regulations of MHADA. The whole exercise of re- advertisement and allotment shall be completed within a period of three months from date. 3. With the aforesaid directions, the Petition is disposed of sd/- sd/- [R.M.SAVANT, J] [S.B.MHASE, J]