bipin prithiani 1 4-wp-3527.26.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3527 OF 2026 Imrankhan Naseer Khan … Petitioner Versus The Office of Superintendent, City Survey and Land Records & Ors. … Respondents ****** Ms. Shashikala B. Vardhamane for Petitioner. Mr. Suraj Gupte, AGP for Respondent Nos.1, 3, 4 and 6-State. ****** CORAM : MANISH PITALE AND SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ. DATE : 31st AUGUST 2026 P.C. : . The learned Advocate representing the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court peculiar circumstances. She filed this petition for the petitioner named Imrankhan Naseer Khan. 2. Thereafter, she received a complaint from the said Imrankhan Nasser Khan, stating that he had never approached her for filing the writ petition. It was stated that one Ameer Wazir Ahmed Shaikh had approached her for filing of the petition and the petition appears to have been filed in the name of Imrankhan Naseer Khan. Along with the complaint, copies of Aadhar Card and Pan Card of Imrankhan Naseer Khan were annexed. 3. Thereupon, when the Advocate contacted the person, who had reached out to her for preparing and filing of the writ petition, it came to light that the said Ameer Wazir Ahmed Shaikh and Imrankhan Naseer Khan know each other and that there was BIPIN DHARMENDER PRITHIANI Digitally signed by BIPIN DHARMENDER PRITHIANI Date: 2026.08.31 17:52:42 +0530 bipin prithiani 2 4-wp-3527.26.doc some confusion with regard to the instructions given to the Advocate for filing the said writ petition. The learned Advocate has also brought to the notice of this Court the response by Mr. Ameer Wazir Ahmed Shaikh. In the complaint lodged by Imrankhan Naseer Khan there does not appear to be a direct allegation made against the said Ameer Wazir Ahmed Shaikh. 4. Be that as it may, the petition appears to be defective on account of the said facts brought to the notice of this Court. In this backdrop, the Advocate who had filed this petition, seeks withdrawal of the writ petition, so that such a defective petition is not proceeded with. 5. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of as withdrawn. 6. This Court is not commenting on the statements made by Imrankhan Naseer Khan and Ameer Wazir Ahmed Shaikh, while interacting with the Advocate, who filed this writ petition. 7. In the interest of justice, liberty is reserved for Imrankhan Naseer Khan to file a properly instituted writ petition in this Court, for raising the grievance highlighted in this writ petition. 8. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter. 9. All rights and contentions of the parties are kept open. (SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.)