5-WP-3064-2026.DOC Chitra Sonawane. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3064 OF 2026 Ashok Ramniwas Vishwakarma …Petitioner. Versus Addl.Collector(Encroachment/Removal) Western Suburb & Ors. …Respondents. Mr. Kaustubh Gidh, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Mohit Jadhav, Addl. GP with Prashant Kamble, AGP for State/Respondent Nos.1 and 4. Mr. Girish Utangale i/by Utangale & Co., for the Respondent No.3/MHADA. CORAM: SUMAN SHYAM & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ. DATED: 17th AUGUST 2026. PC:- 1. The primary grievance of the Petitioner is to the effect that, despite the Order dated 19th June 2017, passed by Respondent No.1, the Respondent No.3-MHADA has failed to take action against the Developer. In order to enable the learned Counsel for Respondent No.3 to obtain instructions, we had granted time and fixed the writ petition today i.e. 17th August 2026. 2. Mr.Girish Utangale, learned Counsel for Respondent No.3/MHADA has produced a copy of Order dated 14th February 2019, passed in Writ Petition (L) No. 1151 of 2018, to submit that CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Digitally signed by CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Date: 2026.08.18 19:44:37 +0530 5-WP-3064-2026.DOC Order dated 19th June 2017 has already been set aside. The same is retained in record and marked ‘X’ for identification. Therefore, direction, as prayed for in this writ petition, would no longer be maintainable in the eyes of law. 3. Responding to the above submission, learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that the writ petition can be disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioner to avail appropriate legal remedy in the matter, as may be permissible under the law. Said submission of the Petitioner's Counsel is found to be reasonable and is, therefore, accepted. 4. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the Petitioner, as prayed for. (ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.) (SUMAN SHYAM, J.)