Dismissed

M/S.Orchid Buildcon Private Limited v. the State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC26 Mar 2010WP/604/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a writ petition in land redevelopment, the Bench held that petitioners must approach the High Power Committee for relief rather than seeking interim orders from this Court. The petition was dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to move the Committee.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed as withdrawn; liberty to approach High Power Committee and apply for interim relief before it.

M/S.Orchid Buildcon Private Limited Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 604 OF 2010

¶5

Orchid Buildcon Private Limited ...Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents

¶8

Mr. M.P. Rao with Mr. V.H. Kamadi i/by M/s. VKLex & Associates for the Petitioners

¶9

Mr. D.A. Nalawade, Government Pleader, for Respondent No.1

¶10

Mr. J.G. Reddy for Respondent No.2

¶11

Mr. A.P. Kulkarni for Respondent No.3

¶12

Mr. S.G. Surana for Respondent No. 4.

¶13

CORAM: J.N. PATEL AND A.P. BHANGALE, JJ . DATE: MARCH 26, 2010

¶14

P.C.:-

¶15

Heard.

¶16

The petitioners have approached this Court for seeking a

¶17

Writ of Mandamus against the respondents, particularly respondents

¶18

No.1 and 2, to examine the proposal of the petitioners dated 14^th

¶19

June, 2007 in respect of rehabilitation of slums under

¶20

¶21

the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 in respect of the plot bearing CTS No. 2A(Part) of Village Powai situate at Adi Shankaracharya Marg, IIT, Mumbai, which is admeasuring 8585.65 square metres. It is the case of the petitioners that respondents No. 3 and 4, in collusion, have misled the respondent-authorities in obtaining NOC for the redevelopment of the land, which is the subject-matter of this petition.

¶22

In view of the fact that the petition pertains to the dispute relating to re-development of a slum area, it will be appropriate that the petitioners approach the High Power Committee, which is constituted by the State Government pursuant to the order passed by this Court in the case of Tulsiwadi Navnirman Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. , reported in 2008(1) Bom.C.R. 1.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that till then, the petitioners deserve to be protected against respondents No.3 and 4 from implementing the Re-development Scheme.

¶24

¶25

In our view, it would be proper for the petitioners to seek appropriate relief from the High Power Committee; and it will not be just and proper for this Court, while reverting the petitioners to the High Power Committee, to pass any interim orders as sought.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners would approach the High Power Committee, and the petitioners be permitted to withdraw the petition. As observed by the Court, the petitioners would also move an application before the High Power Committee for interim relief.

¶27

We, therefore, permit the petitioners to withdraw the petition, with liberty to approach the High Power Committee. Needless to say that if any application for interim relief is moved by the petitioners, the High Power Committee would take a decision in the matter after hearing all the stake-holders in the re-development.

¶28

The petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty aforestated.

¶29

J.N. PATEL, J.

¶30

A.P. BHANGALE, J.

M/S.Orchid Buildcon Private Limited v. the State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Orchid Buildcon Private Limited v. the State of Maharashtra and 2 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

M/S. Rehab Pranay Developers and 2 Ors. Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 5 Ors.

Vidyashankar Tripathi Vs Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking

Kala Uttam Jain Vs the Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

Namdev Bhanaji Bhuwad and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Mohd. Farooq Abdul Kadar Vs the Maharashtra Housing Area Development Authority and 1 Ors.

Mahendra J.Vora Vs B.M.C. and Ors.