SHRIVALLABH P. PAI FONDEKAR Vs. DY. TOWN PLANNER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Lawande, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Pravin Faldessai, learned Additional Government Advocate for Respondent No. 1.

(2.) The record indicates that Ms. Collasso appears for Respondent No. 2, however, on behal of Ms. Collasso, Mr. K. Poulekar today appears and states that Ms. Collasso has already given a notice to Respondent No. 2 that she intends to withdraw her appearance.

(3.) The record indicates that Respondent No. 2 has been served and this matter was adjourned from time to time for effective appearance by Respondent No. 2. Mr. Lawande, learned Counsel for the Peritioner points out that Respondent No.2 was impleaded as a party in this petition because one of the conditions on account of which the impugned order of revocation of Technical Clearance was passed that the Petitioner had constructed a gate which allegedly blocked the access relating to the existing residential house of Respondent No. 2 and that this was an alleged violation of condition no. 14 of the terms.