1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4109 OF 2009 1) Omprakash s/o Sitaram Agrawal, Age : 60 years, Occ. Business And Agriculture R/o 122, Navi Peth, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon 2) Satish s/o Soma Bhole, Age : 54 years, Occ. Business And Agriculture, R/o Tailor House, Shivram Nagar Opposite Collector Bunglow Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon 3) Indravadan s/o Shivlal Shah Died : through L.Rs. 3A) Mrs Hansa w/o Indravadan Shah, Age : 50 years, Occ. Business r/o Tijori Galli, Polan Peth Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon 3B) Nishan s/o Indravadan Shah, Age : 23 years, Occ. Service r/o Tijori Galli, Polan Peth, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon 3C) Mrs Mayuri Hemang Shah, Age : 26 years, Occ. Housewife r/o 202, Athithi Flats, 4, Jain Society, near Preetamnagar Akhada, Paldi, Ahmedabad (Gujrat State) ..PETITIONERS VERSUS 2 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 2. The Director of Town Planning, Maharashtra State, Pune, Tq. & Dist. Pune 3. The Deputy Director of Town Planning, Nashik Division Nashik, Tq. & Dist. Nashik 4. The Assistant Director of Town Planning, Jalgaon, Tq. Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon ..RESPONDENTS Mr A.B. Kale, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr V.H. Dighe, AGP for respondents no.1 to 4. CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ DATE : 31st August 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER P.V.HARDAS , J ] 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners pray for directing respondents to decide the application/representation submitted by the petitioners, dated 26.8.2002 and the other representations which are pending. In 3 the light of the limited relief which the petitioners have prayed for in this petition, we deem it appropriate to decide this petition finally at this stage. 3. Since the said representation dated 26.8.2002 and the other subsequent representations submitted by the petitioners are pending, we direct the respondents to decide the pending representations of the petitioners within three months from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioners. 4. We wish to clarify that since we have not adjudicated the issue involved in the representations on merits, the respondents shall decide the same in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the fact that we have directed them to decide the same. 5. Rule is thus made absolute on the terms indicated above with no order as to costs. ( A.V.POTDAR ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE amj/wp4109.09 4