-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 693 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3862 OF 2008 Rajshree H. Shah. ..Applicant. Versus Kalina Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd, Mumbai. ..Respondents. ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 701 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 8398 OF 2007 Capt. Rajesh G. Karla. ..Applicant. Versus Kalina Co-op. Hsg. Society Ltd, Mumbai. ..Respondents. Mr. R. S. Apte, Sr. Counsel a/w Ashutosh Gole for the applicant. Mr. P. C. Thomas for R-1. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : March 24, 2011. P. C. : 1. Learned counsel for the applicant states that he does not press for the relief claimed under prayer clause (b) in both the aforesaid civil applications. 2. The issue involved in both the aforesaid writ petitions is one and the same, namely, grant of membership to the applicant by respondent – society. The applicant’s application for membership was allowed by the authorities below. However, the respondent srp -: 2 :- society has challenged this order by filing the aforesaid two writ petitions and same are admitted. 2. It is the submission of the applicants that in view of the pendency of writ petitions in this Court, the respondent-society has neither granted membership nor any direction are being issued by the authorities below. He submitted that the flats in question are lying vacant. He submitted that the flats are in dilapidated condition and in the absence of direction from the respondent authorities, namely, Registrars, the applicants are not in a position to stay in their flats and in fact they are not staying there. The aforesaid submission is disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent–Society. In above circumstances, in my view, the case for early hearing is made out. The hearing of both the writ petitions is, therefore, expedited. Place the above-said two writ petitions on the final hearing board in the week commencing from 20th June 2011. 3. Both the aforesaid civil applications are disposed of. (RANJIT MORE, J.)