Petitioner sought a direction to reconstruct a portion of a structure allegedly demolished by Respondents. The single-judge bench dismissed the petition as a question of fact that required judicial determination, refusing to intervene at this stage.
None. Petition dismissed as it involves a question of fact requiring judicial determination.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5475 OF 2008
Bhaskar Booba Sheety ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr. Uday P.Warunjikar, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. P.P.Kakade, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
CORAM: BILAL NAZKI & J.H.BHATIA,JJ.
DATE: 3rd October, 2008.
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner seeks a direction from this Court
to the Respondents to allow the petitioner to
reconstruct the portion allegedly demolished by them
without the authority of law. This is question of
fact will have to be decided.
3. One of the respondents has filed an affidavit in
which he has stated that the structure, which is
2
referred to in the Petition, was an unauthorised
structure. Since the question of fact will have to be
decided, we do not think that this Petition can be
maintained. The Petition is accordingly dismissed.
4. However, the Petitioner is at liberty to take any
remedy that may be available to him in law.
(BILAL NAZKI, J.)
(J.H.BHATIA, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow petitioner to reconstruct a portion allegedly demolished without authority.
Bhaskar Booba Sheety
State of Maharashtra
BILAL NAZKI
J.H. BHATIA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court