Dismissed

Parkbay Co-Operative Housing Society v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

Bombay HC22 Sept 2015WP/1382/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition arises from an order declaring a structure unauthorized. The court accepts the petitioner's acceptance of the illegality and grants relaxation. It directs the petitioner to apply for regularisation within six weeks, stays the impugned order during the process, and reserves demolition as an alternative if the application fails.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to apply for regularisation within six weeks; impugned order of 14th March 2015 stayed pending decision on regularisation application or deemed served order.

Parkbay Co-Operative Housing Society Vs Municipal… — Municipal and Town Planning | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

wp-1382.15 os.doc

¶2

pmw

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1382 OF 2015

¶5

Parkbay Co-operative Housing Society

¶6

Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr. Respondents

¶9

Mr. Sachin Chavan, for the Petitioner.

¶10

Mrs. Geeta Jogalekar, for the Respondent BMC. Mr. Rahul Ramesh Madanputra, personally present.

¶11

CORAM : A.S. OKA & V.L. ACHLIYA, JJ.

¶12

DATE : 22^nd SEPTEMBER, 2015

¶13

P.C.

¶14

. Not on board. Taken on board.

¶15

. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and

¶16

the learned counsel appearing for the first and second Respondents. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner on instructions of Shri Rahul Ramesh Madanpotra states that the Petitioner wants to apply for regularisation of the construction subject matter of the impugned order. We accept the said statement. In view of this statement, it is clear that the Petitioner has accepted that the construction subject matter of the order dated 14^th March, 2015 (Exhibit-I to the Petition) has been made without obtaining development permission. As the alleged unauthorised structure is only of brick masonry compound wall with M.S. Gate, a

¶17

1 of 4

¶18

wp-1382.15 os.doc

¶19

permission deserves to be granted to the Petitioner to apply for regularisation. Accordingly, we dispose of the Petition by passing the following order :-

¶20

ORDER

¶21

(i) It will be open for the Petitioner to make an application for regularisation of the offending structure within a period of six weeks from today. Application shall be made in the prescribed form through a licensed Architect;

¶22

(ii) If such application is made, appropriate authority of the first Respondent Corporation shall decide the same within a period of two months from the date on which the application is presented;

¶23

(iii) The order passed on the application be communicated to the Petitioner or to the Petitioner's licensed Architect. Till the date of communication of the order to the Petitioner or to the Petitioner's licenced Architect, whichever is earlier, the impugned order dated 14^th March, 2015 shall not be implemented. If the order be adverse to the Petitioner, the impugned order dated 14^th March, 2015

¶24

2 of 4

¶25

wp-1382.15 os.doc

¶26

shall not be implemented for a period of one month from the date on which the order is served to the Petitioner or to the Petitioner's licensed Architect, whichever is earlier;

¶27

(iv) We make it clear that we have not made adjudication on the merits of the application which will be made by the Petitioner for regularisation;

¶28

(v) In the event of failure of the Petitioner to apply for regularisation within the stipulated period, it will be open for the first Respondent to demolish the structure in accordance with law.

¶29

(vi) All concerned to act upon an authenticated copy of this

¶30

order.

¶31

(V.L. ACHLIYA, J ) (A.S. OKA, J )

¶32

3 of 4

¶33

wp-1382.15 os.doc

¶34

Certified to be true and correct copy of the original signed Judgment/order.

¶35

4 of 4

Parkbay Co-Operative Housing Society v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parkbay Co-Operative Housing Society v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

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

Shri. Sanjay Dilip Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, P.W.D. and Ors.

Mr. Hanif Gulamali Somji and Ors. Vs Purnima Agro Projects Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

Shri. Sanjay Dilip Patil and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, P.W.D. and Ors.

Kumar Builders Mumbai Realty Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Ms Vasumati Mangaldas Shah and Ors.

Amit Jhaveri and Anr. Vs Bank of Baroda and Ors.