Disposed

Muthu Kandaswami M. Devendra and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Aug 2013WP/1561/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition seeking alternate accommodation for demolished premises. The High Court, noting the petitioners seek only an order to consider their application, directed the Municipal Corporation to do so and allowed the petitioners to challenge the subsequent order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.3 (Municipal Corporation) to consider the petitioners' application for permanent alternate accommodation.

Muthu Kandaswami M. Devendra and Ors. Vs the State of… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

wp1561-12

¶2

vai

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1561 OF 2012

¶5

Muthu Kandaswami M. Devendra & Ors. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶6

...Petitioners

¶7

...Respondents

¶8

Mr.Anand Mishra i/b Mr.Ashok M. Saraogi for the Petitioners.

¶9

Mr.Milind More, A.G.P. for the State - Respondent Nos.1, 2, 6 and 7.

¶10

Mr.Vinod Mahadik for the B.M.C. - Respondent Nos.3 and 4.

¶11

Mr.D.A. Nalawade, Government Pleader with Mr.J.G. Aradwad - Reddy for Respondent Nos.5, 6 and 8.

¶12

CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR & K.R. SHRIRAM, JJ. DATE : 26TH AUGUST, 2013.

¶13

P.C. :-

¶14

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally.

¶15

The petitioners seek the following relief :-

¶16

“(a) appropriate writ, order and direction directing the Respondents to forthwith consider the documents in possession of the Petitioners in respect of their use, occupation and possession of their respective premises and subject to verification of the said documents, be directed to forthwith provide necessary permanent alternate accommodation to the Petitioners in lieu of their existing premises being the premises situated at the plot of land situated at adjacent to Bombay Sewerage / Drainage Project, Mahakali Nagar, Dr.Narayan Hardikar Marg also

¶17

1/3

¶18

wp1561-12

¶19

known as Sasmira Marg, Worli, Mumbai - 400 025 on such further terms as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper.”

¶20

The petitioners at this stage only seek an order directing the Municipal Corporation to decide whether they are entitled to the reliefs being granted for the permanent alternate accommodation after considering the documents in their possession.

¶21

The petitioners had earlier filed Writ Petition No.681 of 2011 challenging the order of the High Power Committee, which found that the petitioners were not eligible under the scheme dealt with in that case. The writ petition was disposed of by an order and judgment dated 30.11.2011. The order noted that it had been found that no SRA scheme had been sanctioned on the plot, wherein the petitioners’ structures were situated. A Division Bench therefore, held that the petitioners did not have any cause of action to make any grievance and accordingly, dismissed the petition.

¶22

The petitioners’ case is that thereafter the corporation demolished their structures for the reasons not communicated to the petitioners and without any notice.

¶23

In these circumstances, we see no objection to granting the limited relief viz. directing respondent No.3 – Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai to consider the petitioners’ application. Needless to add that if the petitioners are aggrieved by

¶24

2/3

¶25

wp1561-12

¶26

the order, they are always at liberty to challenge the same.

¶27

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶28

(K.R. SHRIRAM, J.) (S.J. VAZIFDAR, J.)

¶29

3/3

Muthu Kandaswami M. Devendra and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Muthu Kandaswami M. Devendra and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

Ms. Saloni Manish Mehta Vs Svkm'S Pravin Gandhi College of Law

Dr. Mahesh Shripad Chandurkar Vs the Addl. Chief Secretary General Administration Department and 11 Ors.

Shri S.S.Shah and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.