1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3002 OF 2011 (Dilip W. Bhamburkar & Anr. vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & P.D. KODE, JJ. AUGUST 08, 2011. Heard finally Shri Manohar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Shri Kankale, learned AGP for the respondents, as per notice dated 30th June 2011. The petitioners are seeking renewal of their respective lease in accordance with stipulation for renewal contained in lease agreement and the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Jaikumari Amarbahadursingh vs. State of Maharashtra, reported at 2009 (1) ALL MR 343. The respondents have filed reply through Respondent No. 2 stating that as necessary report is not received from City Survey Officer No. 3, renewal could not be effected. It is also submitted that after receipt of such report, the action in the context of renewal of lease will be taken. Shri Manohar, learned counsel has pointed out that in reply, Respondent No. 2 has also expected the petitioners to file an affidavit accepting policy 2 decision to be taken by the State Government about renewal of such lease in future as binding upon them. According to learned counsel, there cannot be such an insistence at this stage. He is relying upon the Division Bench judgment in Jaikumari Amarbahadursingh vs. State of Maharashtra, (supra) to urge that there cannot be any such unilateral policy decision. He further states that if any policy decision is to be taken, State Government is free to take it in accordance with law and if it is binding on the petitioners, the same can be implemented but no acceptance of such policy before hand can be insisted. We have perused the judgment of Division Bench judgment mentioned supra. It is apparent that the lease is to be renewed in accordance with stipulation in lease deed and as contemplated in para 37 of the judgment in Jaikumari Amarbahadursingh vs. State of Maharashtra, (supra). The document of lease also contains a stipulation in this respect. The need to have report of City Survey Officer is not brought on record. The learned AGP is seeking time to point out relevance of that report. In this situation, we direct the respondents to execute appropriate renewal in favour of the petitioners without insisting upon any affidavit as indicated in reply, within a period of eight weeks from today. If any report of City Survey officer is needed, Respondent No. 2 is free to call it from that officer within the time limit imposed 3 by this Court. Writ petition is thus partly allowed. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Copy of this order be supplied to the petitioners after deficit court fee on petition is paid. JUDGE JUDGE *GS.