1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIGINAL SIDE WRIT PETITION {LODGING} NO.2678 OF 2009 Vijay Budhaji Gurav & Anr. .... Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra & others .... Respondents Shri Ditendra Mishra for the Petitioners. Shri Milind More, AGP, for the State. Ms G.S. Joglekar for Respondent No.2. Shri V.D. Patil for Respondent No.3. Shri A.R. Pande for Respondent No.7. CORAM: J.N. PATEL AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ. DATED: MARCH 22, 2010 P.C: 1. After we had heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at length and also petitioner No.1, who is present in the Court, petitioner No.1 states that he is not interested in prosecuting the petition. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be permitted to withdraw the petition. 2 3. We permit the petitioners to withdraw this petition with a caution that in future they should not indulge in such litigation and unnecessarily waste the time of the Court and the statutory authorities. We are required to observe this for the reason that in respect of slum development schemes, there is a mushroom growth of petitions challenging the scheme in one way or the other by persons who are not adversely affected. In the present case, petitioner No.1 s father is a beneficiary and petitioner No.2 has not consented for the re- development scheme. It appears that the petitioners are merely being used by persons who have vested interest in the project to stall the re-development. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn. J.N. PATEL, J. A.P. BHANGALE, J.