Dismissed

Gustad Rashid Irani., v. B. M. C.and Ors.

Bombay HC17 Aug 2009WP/2317/1991

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking eviction of slum dwellers and delivery of vacant possession of a plot under the Town Planning Act, the High Court of Bombay held that the petition must fail. The Court ruled that the Petitioner failed to invoke the specific statutory powers vested in the Planning Authority under Sections 89 and 90 and failed to join the occupants as respondents.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; Rule discharged. No order as to costs.

Gustad Rashid Irani., Vs B. M. C.and Ors. — Municipal and Town Planning | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.2317 OF 1991
...

¶4

Shri Gustad Rashid Irani ...Petitioner

¶5

v/s.

¶6

The Municipal Corporation of
Gr.Bombay & another

¶7

Mr.A.Y.Sakhare,Sr.Advocatei/b D.S.Mhaispurkar
for the Petitioner.

¶8

Ms.S.M.Modle for Respondent No.1.

¶9

Mr.M.D.Naik, AGP for Respondent No.2.

¶10

...
CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH, &
 R.G.KETKAR, JJ
DATED: 17th August, 2009

¶11

P.C.:

¶12

1.By this petition the Petitioner seeks

¶13

writ of mandamus directing the Respondent

¶14

i.e. The Municipal Corporation and the State

¶15

of Maharashtra to deliver vacant possession

¶16

¶17

of Plot No.238, Town Planning Scheme No.III,

¶18

Ghatkopar after removing all unauthorised and
contraveningstructuresandoccupants
therefrom under Sections 89 and 90 of the
Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act,
1966.

¶19

2.It is clear from the record that

¶20

there is slum on the final Plot No.238. There
is already notification issued under Slum Act
for improvement of that slum. That order has
been challenged by the Petitioner in Appeal
before the appropriate authority and that
appeal is pending. While the question whether
the slum is to be improved or not is pending

¶21

before the appropriate authority, the
Petitioner wants this court to issue a writ
of mandamus for eviction of the slum
dwellers. If by issuing a writ of mandamus,
slum dwellers are evicted, the very purpose

¶22

¶23

for which the authorities have issued an

¶24

order for improvement of the slum will be
defeated. That apart, perusal of provisions
of Section 89 of the Town Planning Act shows
that it vests power in the Planning Authority
to summarily evict the persons who are in
possession of the plot so as to hand over
possession of the final plot to the person
who has been held entitled to that plot under
the Town Planning Scheme. Section 90 confers
power on the Planning Authority to enforce
town planning scheme. As the power is vested
in the Planning Authority , the Petitioner
will have to move the authorities invoking
their power under sections 89 & 90 of the
M.R.T.P.Act. We have not been shown a single
document, whereby the Petitioner invoked
power under Sections 89 and 90. In our
opinion, without invoking powers under
Section 89 and 90 of the M.R.T.P. Act, the

¶25

¶26

Petitioner cannot approach this Court for
writ of mandamus directing the authorities to
exercise their power under Sections 89 and
90. We find that this petition is filed by
the Petitioner with full knowledge that there
were structures on the land and the petition
was filed without moving the authorities
invoking their power and without joining the
persons who are occupying those structures.
In our opinion, in these circumstances, no
relief can be granted to the Petitioner in
this petition. Petition, therefore, fails and
is dismissed. Rule discharged. No order as to
costs.

Gustad Rashid Irani., v. B. M. C.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gustad Rashid Irani., v. B. M. C.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramchandra Ramswarup Vs Union of India and Ors.

Krantikari Suraksha Rakshak Sanghatana Vs the Securiti Guards Board for Greater Bombay and Ors.

Sundaram Co-Op.Society Ltd.and Ors. Vs Mun.Corpn.for Gr.Bombay

Tuluru Sobhanchalapati Gupta and Ors. Vs the International Airport Authority of India and Ors.

Sigma Properties Pvt. Ltd. and 3 Ors. Vs the Government of Maharashtra 3 Ors.

All India Central Bank Employees' Congress and Anr. Vs Central Bank of India