IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO. 451 OF 2009 SHRI. ARJUN PANDURANG GOVEKAR AND 9 ORS., ... Petitioners Versus MRS. JAYASHREE SONU NAIK ALIAS HIRABAI SONU ARAUNDEKAR AND 7 ORS., ... Respondents Mr. P. Vengurlekar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Joaquim Godinho, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO, J. Date:- 16th July, 2010 P.C.: Heard. 2. Site plan is produced by respondent no.1. It appears that respondent no.1 had given a clear undertaking before the Administrative Tribunal that respondent no.1 would maintain a 3 meters access to his plot till the disposal of Mundkar Revision Application. The difficulty was that the said 3 meters wide access was not identified. Now it has been identified on the site plan produced by respondent no.1. Counsel on behalf of respondent no.1 states that respondent no.1 will maintain the said 3 meters access as depicted on the site plan till the Mundkar Revision Application is disposed of. The statement is accepted. In the light of that nothing survives in this petition and, accordingly, the same is disposed of. It is expected that the learned Administrate Tribunal will dispose of the revision petition as expeditiously as possible. N. A. BRITTO, J. NH