on 23.01.2014. However, the Petitioner has not produced any actual proof of residence or ownership of the structure in question. The Petitioner has also procured Ration Card in the year 2013, the same would also not enure to the benefit of the Petitioner to show his continuous residence prior to the said Metro Rail Project-3 being implemented. Insofar as the Electrol Roll is concerned, it is significant to note that in the Voter's ID address of the Petitioner is shown as 68, BDD Chawl No.105, S.S. Amrutwar Marg, Mumbai City -18. Hence, the said address is different than the address of the structure being ID No. 196. The Petitioner seeks to rely upon the Agreement and Affidavit entered into with the person who was purported to be in occupation of the said structure ID No. 196 i.e. the predecessor of the petitioner till the year 2008. The said document would also not aid the Petitioner as no credence can be given to the said document. It is in the aforesaid conspectus of facts that the application of the Petitioner before the Floor Level Grievance Redressal Committee and thereafter before the High Power Grievance Redressal Committee came to be rejected. Both the Committees came to a conclusion that the Petitioner has not shown his continuous occupation of the premises so as to entitle him to the grant of permanent alternate accommodation under the Resettlement and Rehabilitation Policy of the Metro Rail Project-3.
