Disposed

Ehsan a. Hakim v. the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC19 Nov 2019WP/3343/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition was withdrawn but disposed of with conditions requiring the petitioner to vacate premises and accepting undertakings from respondents regarding compensation and rehabilitation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to vacate premises by 15.12.2019; Respondent 4 to provide compensation or transit accommodation; Respondent 4 to execute permanent alternate accommodation agreement within 2 months of comme

Ehsan a. Hakim Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors. — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1042 wpl 3026-19=.doc

¶2

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

¶3

WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 3026 OF 2019

¶4

Ehasan A. Hakim … Petitioner

¶5

V/s.

¶6

The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents

¶7

Mr. Chetan Kapadia, a/w Mr. Anoshak Daver, Ms. Deepa Bisht, Mr. Chirag Saraogi i/b Mr. Tushar Goradia for the Petitioner.

¶8

Mr. Hemant Haryan, AGP for the Respondent/State. Mr. T.D. Deshmukh for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar, Senior Counsel a/w Mr. Chirag Kamdar, Nanki Grewal, Paridhi Saraf i/b Wadia Ghandy & Co. for Respondent No.4.

¶9

CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI,& R.I.CHAGLA, J.J. DATED : 19/11/2019

¶10

P.C.

¶11

In this petition which is listed under the caption for withdrawal, on the previous occasion the following order was passed:

¶12

“P.C.

¶13

1 Having heard both sides and since the withdrawal is opposed on the ground that the Petitioners are indulging in forum shopping having taken beneft of the order passed on 11^th October, 2019, we grant liberty to the contesting Respondent No.8 in Writ Petition No. 743 of 2019 in which that order is passed and which Respondent

¶14

Sneha Chavan

¶15

1/3

¶16

1042 wpl 3026-19=.doc

¶17

No.8 in that petition is also the fourth Respondent in these petitions, to move an application to the Hon’ble the Chief Justice so that Writ Petition No. 743 of 2019 can be clubbed with these petitions for hearing by this Bench.

¶18

2 List the petitions on the “Supplementary Board” on 19^th November, 2019 along with Writ Petition (L) Nos. 3013/19, 3014/19, 3017/19, 3068/19 and 3073/19.”

¶19

In pursuance of that order, this petition is listed today as well under the same caption.

¶20

However, after the brief arguments by both the sides, it is agreed that the Writ Petition be disposed of with following order:

¶21

“1. The correct name of Petitioner is Naved Ehsan Hakim. The Petitioner shall vacate his premises being shop no.23 situated at Musafrkhana Building, Bhendi Bazar Area and handover vacant and peaceful possession thereof to the Executive Engineer, MBR&R Board on or before 15^th December 2019. Thereafter the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 can demolish the same.

¶22

The Petitioner states that the Petitioner accepts the cluster development scheme of Respondent No.4 and hence the Petitioner shall be entitled to all transitory benefts and all other benefts at par with the other tenants. Respondent No.4 Trust undertakes that it will hand over a Demand Draft for the transit compensation in the name of the Petitioner, in the event the Petitioner

¶23

Sneha Chavan

¶24

2/3

¶25

1042 wpl 3026-19=.doc

¶26

opts for compensation, simultaneously with the Petitioner handing over the premises, or in the event the Petitioner opts for transit accommodation, Respondent No.4 shall hand over transit accommodation simultaneously with the Petitioner handing over the premises.

¶27

Respondent No.4 Trust agrees and undertakes, within 2 (two) months of the issuance of the commencement certifcate for the sub-cluster in which the Petitioner will be rehabilitated, to enter into an Agreement for Permanent Alternate Accommodation with the Petitioner identifying the location of the premises being provided to the Petitioner.

¶28

The undertakings by the Respondents are accepted as undertaking to this Court.

¶29

The Petition is disposed of accordingly.”

¶30

Writ Petition is therefore, disposed of as not pressed in the light of the minutes. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶31

(R.I.CHAGLA,J.)

¶32

(S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶33

Sneha Chavan

¶34

3/3

Ehsan a. Hakim v. the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ehsan a. Hakim 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajeshwari Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs Thane Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Teachers Association for Non Aided Polytechnics through Secretary (Tafnap) and Anr. Vs All India Council for Technical Education and Ors.

Bhagyshree Vijay Patil Vs R.P. Gogate College of Arts and Science and R.V. Joglekar College of Commerce and Ors.

Maharshi Karve Stree Shikshan Samstha, through Secretary, Mr. Ravindra Laxman Deshpande Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Dept and Ors.

Society for Computer Technology and Research and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Dept and Ors.

Mohammad Khan Ali Jahangirpurwala Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.