-#- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1277 OF 2006 Ramchandra M. Jagtap & Ors. ... Petitioner Versus The Chief Executive Officer, S.R.A. and Ors. ... Respondents Mr. C.S. Balsara i/by Shah & Sanghavi for Petitioner. Mr. G.D. Utangale for R. No. 1. Mr. T.N. Subramanian i/by Suresh Chougule for R.No. 2. Mr. M. Sathe, Sr. Counsel with Mr. R.A. Rodrigues i/by Kanga & Co.f or R. No. 3. Mrs. S. Ajit Kumar for R. No. 4. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & ANOOP V. MOHTA JJ ANOOP V. MOHTA JJ ANOOP V. MOHTA JJ. DATE : 4th May, 2006 DATE : 4th May, 2006 DATE : 4th May, 2006 P.C.: . In the ordinary course, we would not have entertained this petition when there is a society who is responsible for the development. However, on behalf of respondent No. 2, their learned counsel makes a statement that they had already communicated to Respondent No. 1 to appoint respondent No. 3 as a developer and that the application is pending before the Respondent No. 1 pursuant to the termination of the first developer by Respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 1 to call the parties in terms of the judgement of this court and after hearing the parties, dispose of the application of Respondent No. 2 according to law within the period of six weeks from today. (F.I.REBELLO, (F.I.REBELLO, (F.I.REBELLO, J.) J.) J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)