Dismissed

Hashmat Ali Riyasat Ali Shaikh v. 1. Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilition Authority and Others.

Bombay HC22 Jun 2011WP/4553/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the court rejected the petitioners' challenge against the rejection of their application by the High Power Committee and the ongoing demolition of huts under the slum rehabilitation scheme, citing an alleged ulterior motive for filing the petition.

What did the court decide?

The petition is rejected on the grounds that it appears to be filed with an ulterior motive and cannot be entertained.

Hashmat Ali Riyasat Ali Shaikh Vs 1. Chief Executive… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

1 wp4553-11.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.4553 OF 2011

¶4

Hashmat Ali Riyasat Ali Shaikh and ors. ..Petitioners Vs

¶5

The Chief Executive Officer,

¶6

Slum Rahabilitation Authority and ors.

¶7

..Respondents

¶8

Mr.S.M.Bandkar, for petitioners.

¶9

Mr.S.U.Kamdar, Senior Advocate with Mr.D.F.Sharma i/b., for respondent no.5.

¶10

CORAM : D.K.DESHMUKH & R.G.KETKAR, JJ.

¶11

DATE : 22nd JUNE, 2011

¶12

P.C:

¶13

Mentioned. Not on board.

¶14

2] By this petition, the petitioners challenge rejection of their application by the High Power Committee. Though the petitioners have not filed any Appeal before the High Power Committee, they have filed an application in Appeal filed by some other Society. The learned counsel for the petitioners is not in a position to explain how such application would be maintainable. In any case, the petitioners make grievance against the demolition of the huts which is going on for implementation of the slum

¶15

2 wp4553-11.odt

¶16

rehabilitation scheme supported by the respondent no.5.

¶17

3] The learned counsel for the respondent no.5 has assured us that if the petitioners want they can be given alternate accommodation. If they do not want alternate accommodation, they can claim rent in lieu of alternate accommodation and, after completion of the scheme, they will be given permanent accommodation.

¶18

4] In any case, it appears that the petition is filed with an ulterior motive and the same cannot be entertained. Petition is rejected.

¶19

[R.G.KETKAR, J.] [D.K.DESHMUKH, J.]

Hashmat Ali Riyasat Ali Shaikh v. 1. Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilition Authority and Others.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hashmat Ali Riyasat Ali Shaikh v. 1. Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilition Authority and Others.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Clean City Council Vs Thane Muncipal Corporation and Ors.

Ateeq Ahmed Kamal Ahmed Vs Malegaon Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Madhukar Damodar Sonawane and Ors. Vs Nashik Municipal Coaporation and Ors.

Pulin Co. Operative Hsg. Soc Ltd., and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Balasaheb Mahadev Yerande and Anr. Vs the Stae of Maha. and Ors.

Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust Vs Mundra Port and Special Economic Zone Ltd. and Ors.