JUDGMENT : M.S. SONAK, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. The rule is made returnable forthwith with the consent of and at the request of the learned Counsel for the parties. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents waive service. 3. The petitioner's grievance is against respondent no. 7, who is alleged to have set up a fabrication workshop in an area which the petitioner claims is zoned as “S1.” The petitioner contends that in such a zone, a fabrication workshop cannot be set up. The petitioner also contends that the workshop is causing pollution and the authorities, despite complaints, have not taken any action. 4. Based on the aforesaid, the petitioner has prayed for directions to the respondents to take action and revoke the permissions, if any, granted to respondent no. 7. Alternatively, the petitioner has sought for the following relief in prayer clause (d), which reads as follows: “(d) Alternatively for a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directing the respondent no. 5 and 6 to consider the representation/complaints dated 23.12.2020 filed by the petitioner before respondent no. 5 and complaint dated 30.06.2021 in accordance with law within a timeframe as deemed appropriate by this Hon'ble Court.” 5. According to us, there can be no harm in granting the petitioner the alternate relief as prayed for. The petitioner has made complaints and even otherwise it is the duty of the statutory authorities to at least look into the complaints and dispose of such complaints in accord with law within some reasonable time. 6. Ms. Shaikh, learned Counsel for respondent no. 5-Panchayat, on instructions, states that the representations/complaints dated 23.12.2020 and 30.06.2021 made by the petitioner will be disposed of in accord with law and on their own merits within 60 days from today. Similarly, Mr. Pavithran, who appears for respondent no. 6, i.e. the Goa State Pollution Control Board states that even the Goa State Pollution Control Board will dispose of the representations/complaints within 60 days from today. Both these statements are accepted and the respondent nos. 5 and 6 are directed to act accordingly. 7. If any adverse orders are intended to be passed then respondent nos. 5 and 6 will have to comply with principles of natural justice and fair play. Both these statements are accepted and the respondent nos. 5 and 6 are directed to act accordingly. 7. If any adverse orders are intended to be passed then respondent nos. 5 and 6 will have to comply with principles of natural justice and fair play. In the peculiar facts of this case, even the petitioner can be heard in the matter. 8. The Rule is accordingly made absolute in terms of prayer clause (d) quoted above, by clarifying that this Court has not gone into the rival contentions on merits and, therefore, all contentions of all parties are left open for determination by respondent nos. 5 and 6. 9. The parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.