1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7735 OF 2010 Santosh s/o Ramnath Udmale, Age 38 years, Occu.Business, R/o Indiranagar, Pathardi, Taluka Pathardi, Dist.Ahmednagar ..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through The Secretary, Town Planning & Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32 2. The Deputy Director, Urban Development, Nashik Division, Nashik, Sahyadri Building, Shahu Path, Nashik road, Nashik 3. The Pathardi Municipal Council, Pathardi, District Ahmednagar, through its Chief Officer ..RESPONDENTS Mr.A.P.Avhad, Advocate for petitioner Mr.D.R.Kale, Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondents 1 & 2 Mr.K.D.Bade Patil, Advocate for respondent No.3 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ DATE : 26th OCTOBER 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. This petition obviously is a petition in public interest and the petitioner by this petition seeks the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 and 2 to decide the application/proposal of the Municipal Council, Pathardi in respect 2 of alteration of the limit of the Municipal Council area. The petitioner has prayed for other reliefs which presently are not germane while deciding this petition. Affidavit-in-reply has been filed on behalf of respondent No.1 and, therefore, we issue Rule making Rule returnable forthwith. 2. In the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent No.1, it is stated that the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India by his letter dated 22.9.2009 regarding “Census of India 2011 – Fixing of Boundaries of Administrative Units during the period of Census Operations ” had asked all the State Governments not to make any changes in boundaries of the existing Administrative Units during the period from 1st January 2010 to 31st March 2011. In the affidavit-in-reply at paragraph No.10 it is, therefore, stated that in the light of the communication of the Census Commissioner, Government of India, the respondent No.1 is unable to decide the proposal submitted in respect of alteration of the Municipal limits of Municipal Council, Pathardi till 31st March 2011. It is stated that upon receipt of the required information from the Collector, Ahmednagar, the respondent No.1 would be in a position to finalise the proposal after 31st March 2011. We accept the aforesaid statement as an undertaking to Court and in the light of the statement make Rule absolute with no orders as to costs. ( A.V. POTDAR ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/7735.10wp) 3