Partly allowed

Hidayatulla Amirmaja Mulla and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Bombay HC28 Aug 2019WP/2028/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, owners of land, approached via writ petition complaining that the Respondent Municipal Council took possession without paying compensation or releasing Transferable Development Rights (TDR). The Court residents that while a resolution existed for TDR release, no compensation or TDR was given, and a pipeline was laid.

What did the court decide?

Determined that Respondent No. 2-Municipal Council shall pay compensation at market rate or release TDR in favour of the petitioner within three months.

Hidayatulla Amirmaja Mulla and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

Sr. No.9 WP 2028 of 2018.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2028 OF 2018

¶3

Hiddayatulla Amirmaja Mulla & Ors. … Petitioners

¶4

¶5

State of Maharashtra Through Secretary Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai & Ors. ... Respondents

¶6

Mr. Kalpesh V. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Sharad Bhosale i/b. Dilip Bodake, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.

¶7

Mr. Y.S. Khochare, AGP for Respondents No. 1, 3 & 4.

¶8

CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ DATE : AUGUST 28 th , 2019

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1 . This Court as on 10.08.2018 passed the following order :-

¶11

“Mr. Bodake, learned counsel for the respondent No.2, does not dispute that the petitioners are the owners of the subject land. He also submits that the possession is taken by the Municipal Council from the petitioners, however, neither compensation nor TDR is given to the petitioners. On the contrary, in the letter dated 19th July, 2018, list of 7 items is given to the petitioners for compliance thereof. We adjourn this petition to 31^st August, 2018.

¶12

2. Meanwhile, the respondent No.2- Municipal Council shall co-operate with the petitioners and the petitioners shall ensure that the said requirements are complied

¶13

Prachi Potdar

¶14

1/2

¶15

Sr. No.9 WP 2028 of 2018.odt

¶16

with so as to facilitate the payment of compensation/TDR. We are making clear that, in the event, the Council fails to pay compensation/TDR to the petitioners for the subject land, the Council shall be liable to handover possession of the subject land back to the petitioners.”

¶17

2 . Respondent No. 2- Municipal Council has not paid compensation or release TDR in favour of the petitioner. It has not given instructions to its counsel, who is seeking time for said purpose.

¶18

3 . We are not inclined to adjourn the matter.

¶19

4 . Records show that Municipal Council has on 23.03.2018 resolved to issue TDR in favour of the petitioner.

¶20

5 . Grievance of the petitioner is this resolution has not been implemented, orders of this Court are not obeyed and still pipeline is laid through his land.

¶21

6 . In this situation, we direct Respondent No. 2-Municipal Council to pay to the petitioner either compensation at market rate or release the TDR in favour of the petitioner, within three months from today. Petition is therefore partly allowed and disposed of.

¶22

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

¶23

(B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶24

Prachi Potdar

¶25

2/2

Hidayatulla Amirmaja Mulla and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hidayatulla Amirmaja Mulla and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary Urban Development Dept. 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

Rajendra Bapurao Angre and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.

Central Bureau of Investigation Vs Jigna Jitendra Vora

Parshuram Ganpati Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra, through the Principal Secretary and Ors.

Yuvraj Keshav Karale Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Social Justice Dept. and Ors.

Shabana Ayub Kazi Vs the Managing Director, City and Industrial Development Corp. Ltd. (Cidco) and Ors.

Smt. Kalamma Malkappa Sutar Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.