-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2124 OF 2010. Sudesh Ganpat Dalvi & Another. ..Petitioners. Versus The Principal Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra & Others. ..Respondents. Mr. Amol P. Mhatre and Ashok Bhatija for the petitioners. Mr. A. M. Kulkarni for respondent nos. 3 & 4. Mr. V. S. Gokhale, AGP for respondent nos. 1, 2, 5, 6 & 7. Coram : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & R. V. MORE, JJ. Date : August 31, 2010. P. C. : 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in the affidavit of Mr. Kamalakar B. Phand, the Chief Lands & Survey Officer of CIDCO, dated 29th JUNE 2010 he has stated as under :- “7. As per the sanctioned development plan the suit land, i.e., Survey No. 96(1+2B) of village Karanjade is falling in Regional Park Zone (RPZ). I say that such lands within RPZ were also notified for acquisition in the year 1970. Since these lands were not acquired within the specified period as per the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as amended in the year 1984, the notification thereof issued in the year 1970 lapsed. srp -: 2 :- Thereafter, respondent nos. 2 & 3 have not processed for acquisition of suit land so far. I say that a separate proposal for consideration as to whether the lands falling in No Development Zone and RPZ are to be acquired or not has been submitted to the Government and the decision of the Government in that regard is awaited.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that in view of the above statement, the petitioners have instructed him to withdraw the petition. Learned counsel states that the petitioners wish to challenge the Zoning. The petitioners may, if so advised, challenge the Zoning in accordance with law. We make it clear that we have expressed no opinion on this aspect. The petition is allowed to be withdrawn and is disposed of as such. (Smt. Ranjana Desai,J.) (R.V. More, J.)