1 vks IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO.56 OF 2009 Gurunath Kashinath Vaidya ..Appellant -versus The Munbai Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, Mumbai .. Respondents CORAM: R. M. SAVANT, J DATED: 16th March,2009 P.C. 1. The Appellant claims alternate accommodation as per policy applicable. It appears that on receipt of the notice dated 3.9.2004, issued by the Additional Collector, Mumbai, asking the appellant to shift from the structure which he is occupying at present and giving vacant possession of the same to the developer within 7 days; the Appellant above named had filed an appeal before the Administrator and Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Mumbai. The said authority has passed an order on 29th January, 2009, directing the competent authority ie Additional Collector, Mumbai, City, to pass a final order in respect of the appellant's eligibility. The Authority has 2 further directed not to undertake demolition of the Appellants structure without passing the final order and without following the due process of law. 2. In view of the order passed by the Administrator and Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, learned counsel for the Appellant states that the Appellant would approach the Additional Collector, Mumbai City, by filing an application before him to prove his eligibility with all the requisite documents in support of the said application. The learned counsel states that the said application would be filed within one week from date. The learned AGP, Shri G.P. Mulekar, submitted that if such an application is filed, the same will be decided by the Additional Collector, Mumbai city within a period of 8 weeks of its receipt. Since the structure of the appellant above named is on land belonging to the Bombay Municipal Corporation, the Additional Collector, may also permit BMC to be represented in the proceeding before him. All the parties to appear before Additional Collector on 30th March,2009 at 3.00 pm. The Additional Collector may thereafter fix the hearing as per his convenience, but would endeavour to dispose of 3 the application of the appellant above named within the period of 8 weeks as mentioned above. 3. In view of the directions given by Administrator and Divisional Commissioner, the notice dated 16th May,2009 (Exhibit E colly to the appeal Memo), has become infructuous. The BMC, however, would be entitled to take such action as permissible in law, contingent upon the decision of the Additional Collector, Mumbai City. 4. In view of the instant order, learned counsel seeks withdrawal of the above Appeal from order. The Appeal from Order is therefore, dismissed as withdrawn. 5. In view of the withdrawal of Appeal, Civil Application does not survive and is accordingly disposed of. (R.M.SAVANT, J)