1/2 24 WP 8956-19.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8956 OF 2019 Shailendra Prabhakar Dixit .. Petitioner Versus Pune Municipal Corporation Through Its Commissioner and Ors. .. Respondents … Mr. Mihir Desai, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Chetan Arvind Alai, Mr. Anup Lahoti, Ms. Meghna Gowalani for the Petitioner. Mr. Ajay Bhise a/w Ms. Deepali Kedar for Respondent No.6. Mr. Vishwanath Patil a/w Mr. Akshay N for Respondent Nos.1 to 4 (Pune Corporation). Mr. Kedar Dighe, Addl G.P. a/w Ms. M.P. Thakur, AGP, for the State. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE & ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ. DATED : 2nd SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C:- 1. The petitioner, an individual claiming to be a devotee of Shankar Maharaj, has filed the present Petition with an avowed purpose of betterment of quality of life of citizens of Pune, and the Petition seeks relief concerning illegal structures and illegal Commencement Certificates, as well as the regularization of alleged illegal structures by the authorities of the Pune Municipal Corporation. 2. At the outset, when we made queries with the Petitioner about his locus, from the Petition, we could peruse that the Petition revolves around Santvarya Yogiraj Shri Shankarmaharaj Samadhi situated at Survey No. 19- B, Dkankawadi, Pune, and the said Trust, according to the Petition, is registered under the Bombay Public Trust Ashish 2/2 24 WP 8956-19.doc Act and look after the affairs of the Samadhi/Temple and provide facilities to the devotees on festive occasions. According to the Petitioner, the Trust was approached by Respondent No.1 for repairs of the old construction, and it was informed that the structure was dangerous and dilapidated, and the officials of the Corporation, without visiting the said structure, granted permission to the Trust to repair the disputed construction without any specification, as a result, the existing structure was demolished and new construction with an RCC structure substituted it. The Petitioner has certain grievances about it, as amounting to an obstacle in Parikrama Marg, and the permission to regularize the structure has been called in question by praying for an inquiry to be conducted against the officials of the Corporation. The learned counsel for Respondent No.6 has invited our attention to the regularization permission granted in its favour in the year 2016 itself. 3. When we questioned the locus of the Petitioner and the fact that it is too late in the day to examine the regularization permission, the learned Senior Counsel Mr. Mihir Desai, representing the Petitioner seeks withdrawal of the Petition. However, this withdrawal of Writ Petition do not forbid a public cause to be espoused if it is available to the Petitioner or any other devotee of Shankar Maharaj or member of public. Petition stands disposed of as withdrawn. (ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.) Ashish