Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.

1. Rule. Learned counsel for the Respondents waive service. The petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, by consent and on the request of the learned counsel.

2. In these proceedings which have been filed in public interest, the grievance of the Petitioner arises out of the failure of the Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (`PCMC') to take steps in accordance with law for demolition of an unauthorized structure. The Third Respondent is a municipal corporator while the Seventh Respondent is her spouse. The Eighth Respondent is the mother of the Seventh Respondent. The reasons why the PCMC has while ostensibly exercising its powers under the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1996 and the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 failed to take any steps for the demolition of a structure for which admittedly there is no building permission, are not difficult to seek. Unfortunately, the PCMC, as the facts would reveal, has lent a willing hand to tolerate a brazen violation of law.

3. A completely unauthorized RCC structure admeasuring about 810 sq.mtrs. consisting of a ground floor and two upper floors has been construc