Nitin Hargovind Vishngara Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Mr. A.A. Siddiquie I/b A.A. Siddiquie and Associates for the petitioner Mr. Milind More, AGP for the respondent no.1 State Mr. Vaibhav V. Ugle for the respondent no.3

¶11

CORAM : A.S. OKA & M.S. SANKLECHA, J.J.

¶12

DATED : 2^nd APRIL, 2019 P.C.

¶13

Perused the additional affidavit filed by the petitioner. It appears

¶14

that he has filed Appeal No. 466 of 2011 a copy of which is annexed to the additional affidavit as Exhibit-E before the Slum Rehabilitation Authority. According to the case of the petitioner, the said appeal is filed by invoking Section 35 of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (for short “said Act of 1971”). When the appeal was preferred, the Appellate Authority was a person holding a post not below the rank of Additional Collector to be notified by the State Government. The appeal was not maintainable before the Slum Rehabilitation Authority. Therefore, a

1 of 2

2077-18-wp-5=.doc

Uday S. Jagtap

writ of mandamus cannot be issued directing the said Authority to decide the appeal.

¶19

Accordingly, we dispose of the petition by passing the following order :-

¶20

ORDER

¶21

(a) It will be open for the petitioner to apply to Slum Rehabilitation Authority for transfer of Appeal No.466 of 2011 to the appropriate Appellate Authority having power to decide the appeal under Section 35 of the said Act of 1971;

¶22

(b) If such an application is made, the Slum Rehabilitation Authority shall decide the same within a period of one month from the date of filing of the application;

¶23

(c) The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶24

(M.S. SANKLECHA, J.)

¶25

2 of 2

Nitin Hargovind Vishngara v. the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin Hargovind Vishngara v. the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhandup Vakratunda Sra Chs Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra through Govt. Pleader High Court Bombay and 4 Ors.

Mangala Tukaram Bhavekar Vs Deputy Collector (Encroachment and Eviction) and Competent Authority and 4 Ors.

the commissioner ofcentral excise -thane-ii Vs m/s milton polyplas (i) p.ltd and 2 Ors.

Anjani Mehta Vs State of Maharashtra through Govt. Pleader High Court O.S. and Anr.

Sunil Patil and 7 Ors. Vs the Charity Commissioner and Anr.

Puran Parviz Niroo and 8 Ors. Vs the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority and 2 Ors.