1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Second Appeal No. 334/2010 (Govind Tryambak Ambekar & another VERSUS State of Maharashtra) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Abhay Sambre, counsel for the appellants. Mrs. Mayuri Deshmukh, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : OCTOBER 11 , 2010 . Heard. The second appeal is ADMITTED on the following substantial question of law. I) Whether the Courts could have held that the notice issued by the respondent-State of Maharashtra to the appellants for removal of encroachment was valid and legal, specially when the purpose for which the encroachment was directed to be removed did not survive in view of the subsequent developments ? Call for Record & Proceedings. Mrs. Deshmukh, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives notice of hearing on behalf of the respondent. 2 C.A.S. NO. 598/2010. Heard. The second appeal is admitted on a substantial question of law. It appears that the State of Maharashtra had asked the appellant by the notice dated 25.08.1997 to remove the encroachment as the State required the premises for opening a Zunka Bhakar Kendra. It is not in dispute that the plan of the Government to open a Zunka Bhakar Kendra on the suit premises was dropped during the pendency of the suit. The appellants have stated in the affidavit that the other 40 plot owners, who had also encroached upon the adjoining land were not asked to remove the encroachment and only the appellants were asked to remove the same in view of the decision of the State Government to open a Zunka Bhakar Kendra on the suit premises. The appellants have also filed an undertaking in this Court that they would vacate the suit premises as and when the other 40 plot owners are required to vacate the premises on which they had constructed the shops. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there would be stay of possession during the pendency of the second appeal. 3 The civil application is allowed and disposed of. JUDGE APTE