1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2349 OF 2009 (Manjusha w/o Madhukar Rangari and others ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and others) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri C.S. Kaptan, Counsel for the petitioners, Shri A.S. Fulzele, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 to 3, Shri M.I. Dhatrak, Counsel for respondent No.4. CORAM:- D.B. BHOSALE AND P.B. VARALE, JJ. DATED :- 12 th JULY, 2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking direction to the respondents to take action for removal of the petitioners' structure after following due process of law and after following principles of natural justice. 3. The petitioners' claim that the offending structure is erected by them after their plans were sanctioned and permission for construction was granted by the Municipal Council, whereas according to the Municipal Council and the Collector, the construction is unauthorized and it is right on the public road. It appears that while issuing notice this Court granted interim relief in terms of prayer clause (III) and that interim order is operating till this date. 2 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 submits that respondent No.4 is prepared to grant hearing to the petitioners and decide whether the offending structure is unauthorized. We do not propose to examine the controversy involved in the present petition and we are satisfied that the following order shall meet the ends of justice. i) Respondent No.4 shall consider and decide, on merits and in accordance with law, the representations made by the petitioners dated 6-1-2009 and 1-6-2009 (Annexure-F), after giving them an opportunity of hearing, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. ii) It is open to the petitioners to place additional material, if any, in support of their contentions at least seven days before the date of hearing fixed by respondent No.4. iii) It is needless to state that respondent No.4 shall pass speaking order and till then no coercive action in respect of the offending structure be taken by respondent Nos. 2 to 4. iv) If the order passed by respondent No.4 on the representations of the petitioners is adverse to the petitioners, same shall remain stayed for a period of two weeks from the date of its communication to the petitioners. 3 v) While passing this order we shall not be understood to have examined the merits of the case. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE pma