Rau” aie re IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION (PROMICISTERESTUTIGATIONNO.Asy.OF20I0 Marud Lalli Wanjari and another -Patitioners ¥s, ‘The State of Meharashwa and others Respondents ‘Mr. WD. Raut tor che pesisioners, AB. Behere, Add). GP. for respomlent Ness) and 4. i. Keluskar fot ceseonder: Nos. 2 and 3, SORAM: BB, MAIMUDAR & AA SAYED. JJ oe oamuaems Be Learned counsel for the, petitioners states that he may be permitted ‘to withdrew the petition. However, dus being @ PIL, such permission cannot be r gramed. Sy wey of thir pertion, che petitioners have prayed that there are 50 sonsmuctons whith fave come in the Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal PLB. MAIMUDAR, 3. 4A. SAYED, J.\* t Exhibit: C HI'SH COURT, Bo! | & 1 HE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE wom CIVIL APPELLATE roasnicrioy e SaBplicars, tis Sha Manni Laifi Wanjani & org: ~ Respondents, Mr GH, Keluiskar adeocare for applicants, Mr VD. Rant, advocaia for responcleni Nos, land 2, Vhatkar, AGE ferresponden: Nos. Sand 4, CORAM: Cr SRE GL at SAngesr 201 Ms. AD PE. A Having heard the teamed eninge} for the applicrnis and the ieemed counsel for the respondent Nos: 1 amd 2 (origina) petivioners) 85 Well as lesrmed AGS for fespondent Nos, 3 and 4; we: “il Application accordingly stands disposed off CHIEF Justice GIRIH GODBOLE, 3 TRUE Copy wants iN" nor SN Saat Appa Boris ; ‘Disclaimer Clause - Authenticated Copy is not a Certifiex| Copy" ne Sinn