Mr.Nikhil Jhaveri Vs Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and Ors.

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

 WRIT PETITION NO.1307 OF 2004

¶5

 Mr.Nikhil Jhaveri .. Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

 Municipal Corporation of
 Greater Mumbai and Ors. .. Respondents

¶8

 WITH

¶9

 WRIT PETITION NO.2083 OF 2005

¶10

 Nav Maharashtra CHS Ltd. & Ors. .. Petitioners

¶11

Vs.

¶12

 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

¶13

 WITH

¶14

 WRIT PETITION NO.1432 OF 2006

¶15

 Shivajinagar Rahivashi Sangh &
 Ors. .. Petitioners

¶16

Vs.

¶17

 State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents

¶18

 Mr.Pradeep Sancheti with Mr.K.R.Khatta i/b
 Mr.Yasmin Bhansali and M/s.Kishore Thakoredas & Co.
 for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.1307 of
 2004

¶19

 Mr.Milind Sathe, Sr.Advocate with Mr.S.Y.Ali i/b
 Mr.Akshay Vani for the petitioner in Writ Petition

¶20

¶21

 No.2083 of 2005

¶22

 Mr.C.U.Singh, Sr.Advocate i/b Mr.Madhav Jamdar for
 the petitioner in Writ Petition No.1432 of 2006 and
 respondent no.7 in Writ Petition No.1307 of 2004

¶23

 Mr.G.D.Utangale i/b M/s.Utangale and Co. for
 respondent/S.R.A.

¶24

 Mr.Pradeep Jadhav, A.G.P. with Mr.J.S.Saluja,
 A.G.P. for the State

¶25

 Ms.A.K.Savla for the B.M.C.

¶26

 CORAM : J.N.PATEL &

¶27

 K.K.TATED, JJ.

¶28

DATED : 4th August, 2008

¶29

 P.C.:

¶30

 1. We are disposing of these petitions by a
 common order as the subject matter of the petitions
 is in respect of slum dwellers who are having their
 structures / hutments on the foreshore land at
 Darabsha Road, Napeansea Road, Mumbai which is
 shown in a sketch annexed to the Writ Petition

¶31

 No.1307 of 2004.

¶32

 2. The petitioner Nikhil Jhaveri filed a writ
 petition no.1307 of 2004 in this court seeking a
 writ of mandamus against respondent nos.6 to

¶33

¶34

 furnish a list of hutment dwellers and Schedule II
 and submit a report to this court so as to assess
 which structures / shanties and hutments are
 protected i.e. which are in existence prior to
 1.1.95 and for further orders and direction to
 remove all other structures / shanties and hutments
 from the said site as they are on government land.
 Various interim orders came to be passed by this
 court in all the three petitions which led to
 filing of Writ Petition No.2083 of 2005 by Nav
 Maharashtra Co-op.Housing Society Ltd. and Ors.
 By virtue of certain interim orders passed in
 earlier petition, their project was affected. This
 court on 24.11.06 in the petition filed by Nav
 Maharashtra Co-op.Housing Society Ltd. and Ors.
 made it clear that for the said project LOI has
 been issued for construction of 2664 tenements for
 the purpose of rehabilitation and 2337 slum
 dwellers were held eligible for rehabilitation. It
 was pointed out by the learned counsel for the
 petitioners that claims of 269 slum dwellers are
 pending before the Competent Authority for
 determination of their eligibility for
 rehabilitation and that if they are found to be

¶35

¶36

 eligible then it will not be possible for the
 promoters of the scheme in whose favour LOI has
 been issued to accommodate the persons by virtue of
 common order having been passed in writ petition
 no.1307 of 2004.

¶37

 3. The court has taken up the petition from
 time to time and passed various interim orders
 which were even challenged before the Honourable
 Supreme Court. This generated another petition by
 the Society of hutment dwellers i.e. Shivajinagar
 Rahivashi Sangh and Ors being Writ Petition No.1432
 of 2006 who have come to this court seeking a
 direction that respondent no.2 SRA should implement
 their decision which has been communicated by order
 dated 09.06.05 which is annexed as Exhibit K to the
 petition to provide for rehabilitation of 65 of
 eligible slum dwellers from Shivaji Nagar Slum
 situated on foreshore land at Darabasha Lane in ’D’
 Ward in the S.R.Scheme being implemented on plot
 bearing C.S.No.725 (pt), 1/725(pt) and 383 of
 Tardeo Divn. of M.P.Mill Compound, New Jaiphalwadi
 and Janta Nagar, wherein members of Nav Maharashtra
 Co-op.Housing Society, who are the petitioners in

¶38

¶39

 Writ Petition No.2083 of 2005, are being
 accommodated and who have also challenged this
 order.

¶40

 4. An amendment has been sought which has been
 granted today by this court in Writ Petition
 No.1432 of 20006 and now it is the case of the
 petitioners in Writ Petition No.1432 of 2006 that
 this court should quash and set aside the proposed
 action of respondent in vacating the eligible
 hutment dwellers of Shivajinagar foreshore land,
 Darabsha Lane, Napean Sea Road, Mumbai with other
 alternate prayers to clause (a) reiterating their
 claim of the right to be accommodated in S.R.
 scheme which is implemented on a plot of land in
 M.P. Mill Compound, New Jaiphalwadi and
 Janatanagar, D Ward, Mumbai D ward.

¶41

 5. In substance, the issue is about preventing
 of encroachment and further construction of
 unauthorised structures / hutments / stanties
 coming up in the area of hutment dwellers of
 Shivajinagar, foreshore land which is represented
 by Shivajinagar Rahivashi Sangh and Ors the

¶42

¶43

 residents of which are also claiming right of
 rehabilitation on the basis that they are at the
 site prior to the cut off date i.e. 1.1.95.

¶44

 6. Full Bench of this court in the case of

¶45

Tulsiwadi Navnirman Coop.Housing Society Ltd. and
anr. vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2008
(1) Bom C.R.1 has directed the Government to
 appoint High Power Committee to go into the issue
 of rehabilitation of slum dwellers under the Slum
 Rehabilitation Act.

¶46

 7. In our view, the subject matter of the
 three petitions directly relates to the
 rehabilitation of eligible slum dwellers who are
 represented by Shivajinagar Rahivashi Sangh and
 Ors. in Writ Petition No.1432 of 2006. Therefore,
 we permit the petitioner Nav Maharashtra CHS Ltd.
 in Writ Petition No.2083 of 2005 and Shivajinagar
 Rahivashi Sangh and Ors in Writ Petition No.1432 of
 2006 to withdraw the petition filed by them and
 approach the High Power Committee constituted under
 the directions of this court in the case of
 Tulsiwadi Navnirman Coop.Housing Society Ltd.and

¶47

¶48

 anr. (Supra). This will enable the High Power
 Committee to take a policy decision in the matter
 of rehabilitation of all the slum dwellers who are
 found eligible and on examining their case further
 issue appropriate orders/ directions and take steps
 to prevent further encroachment on the Foreshore
 Land in question as undisputedly the land belongs
 to the State Government.

¶49

 8. In so far as Writ Petition filed by Nikhil
 Jhaveri i.e. Writ Petition No.1307 of 2004 is
 concerned, we dispose of this petition with a
 direction to the High Power Committee to take
 necessary steps to remove all unauthorised
 structures / hutments which have come up in the
 area after 1.1.95 in the Foreshore Land at Darabsha
 Lane, Off.Napeansea Road, Mumbai in a time bound
 programme by following due process of law.
 Needless to state that all concerned parties would
 be heard by the High Power Committee before any
 decision in the matter is taken. High Power
 Committee should also take preventive steps to see
 that no further encroachment is made on the said
 land.

¶50

¶51

 9. In so far as Chamber Summons No.105 of 2008
 in Writ Petition No.2083 of 2008 is concerned, the
 applicants have sought intervention in the petition
 filed by Nav Maharashtra CHS Ltd. The learned
 counsel for the petitioner strongly objects to
 impleading the applicants as party respondents.

¶52

 10. In so far as the offer made by the
 Competent Authority under the Slum Rehabilitation
 Authority that members of the petitioner
 Shivajinagar Rahivashi Sangh and Ors. in Writ
 Petition No.1432 of 2006 can be accommodated at
 tenements available in Chembur area is concerned,
 the offer will be kept open till the High Power
 Committee takes a decision in the matter.

¶53

 11. In view of the fact that the very cause of
 action for filing this petition arise because of
 the issue of rehabilitation opportunities of the
 applicant / intervenors who are found eligible for
 said rehabilitation under the S.R.A.Scheme
 Therefore this court, permits the applicant to
 intervene in the matter as intervenor but not as

¶54

¶55

 party respondents.

¶56

 12. In view of the fact that this court is not
 disposing this petition on merits, the intervenors
 can very well represent their case before the High
 Power Committee, when it takes up their case for
 rehabilitation and consider the subject land in
 Writ Petition No.2083 of 2005 for the said purpose.

¶57

 13. All the three writ petitions stand disposed
 of accordingly. In view of the fact that this
 court has disposed of all the three petitions, all
 pending Notice of Motions and Chamber Summonses
 also stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶58

 14. We make it clear that the High Power
 Committee would not be influenced by the various
 interim orders passed by this court in view of the
 fact that all the Writ Petitions are disposed of
 and it is left it to the High Power Committee to
 take its own decision in accordance with law, as
 all interim orders stand merged into this final
 order disposing of the petitions. It is left to
 the High Power Committee to pass interim orders if

¶59

¶60

 required as and when such contingency arises and in
 order to preserve statusquo till the matter is

¶61

 finally heard and decided.

¶62

 15. Parties shall maintain statusquo in so far
 as petitioners in Writ Petition No.1432 of 2006 is
 concerned, as it exists on the date of passing of
 this order, and the said statusquo protects only
 those slum dwellers who are found eligible for
 rehabilitation under the S.R.A., all others can be
 evicted by following due process of law.

¶63

 ( J.N. PATEL, J )

¶64

 ( K.K. TATED, J )

Mr.Nikhil Jhaveri v. Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Nikhil Jhaveri v. Municipal Corporation of Gr.Mumbai and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalmani R. Sharma Vs the Municipal Commissioner Mun. Corpn. of Gr. Mumbai and Ors.

K.S.Srinivasan Vs N.Raghunathan and Anr.

K. S. Srinivasan Vs N. Raghunath and Anr.

Neeta Anil Sawant Vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Developers Authority and Ors. and Anil Balkrishna Sawant and Ors.

John Lawrence Quinny and 6 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra

Maredia Associates and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.