1 WP 4203.09.sxw srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4203 OF 2009 Shri Dilip Nivrutti Karanjawane & Ors. ... Petitioners Vs State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. A.V. Anturkar i/b Mr. S.B. Deshmukh for the petitioners. Mr.S.N. Patil, AGP for Respondents No.1 to 3. Mr.S.M.Gorwadkar, for Respondent No.4. CORAM: S.B. MHASE & R.M. SAVANT, JJ. DATED : 26TH AUGUST, 2009. P.C.: 1 Heard. Mr. Gorwadkar, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 on instructions makes a statement that the representation made by the petitioners to seek TDR from the respondent Planning Authority would be considered by the Planning Authority. Earlier letter issued 2 WP 4203.09.sxw by the Assistant Engineer who is not the Competent Authority should not be taken into consideration. The above petition would be taken as a representation and will be considered by the Planning Authority, which means the General Body of the Corporation. The statement made by the learned counsel is accepted. In view of the statement we direct the respondent-Corporation to place this petition by way of representation before the Planning Authority namely, General Body in its regular monthly meeting and let the General Body take a decision in respect of the same. 2 In the light of the aforesaid, the Writ Petition to stand disposed of. (R.M. SAVANT, J.) (S.B. MHASE, J.)