Disposed

Khan Maksudali Samiullah and 2 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Bombay HC21 Feb 2020WP/826/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench disposed of two writ petitions regarding slum rehabilitation under the MSARD Act. It directed payment of interim transit rent to petitioners while their eligibility is pending, barred refund if denied, and ordered handover of tenements within four weeks. An Autism issue detected in subject extraction for this specific case type; corrected subjects below.

What did the court decide?

Directing payment of interim transit rent, barring refund if eligibility denied, and ordering handover of tenements within four weeks.

Khan Maksudali Samiullah and 2 Ors. Vs State of… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

wpl246&247-20.doc

¶2

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

¶3

 WRIT PETITION (L) NO.246 OF 2020

¶4

Qureshi Mohd. Salim Hadis And 2 Ors.

¶5

...Petitioners

¶6

vs

¶7

State of Maharashtra Through Its Principal
Secretary And 4 Ors.

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

WITH

¶10

 WRIT PETITION (L) NO.247 OF 2020

¶11

Khan Maksudali Samiullah And 2 Ors.

¶12

...Petitioners

¶13

vs

¶14

State of Maharashtra Through Its Principal
Secretary And 4 Ors....Respondents

¶15

Mr. Ashif Husain, i/b. Mr. Altaf Khan, for the Petitioners in
WPL/246/2020.

¶16

Mr. Nizamuddin Khan, for the Petitioners in WPL/247/2020.

¶17

Mr. Sukanta Karmakar, AGP, for Respondent No.1 in WPL/246/2020.

¶18

Mr. Rajiv J. Mane, AGP, for Respondent No.1 in WPL/246/2020.

¶19

Mr. Abhijit P. Kulkarni, for Respondent No.2-SRA.

¶20

Mr. Devendra Singh, i/b. Mr. Satyadev Joshi, for Respondent No.5.

¶21

 CORAM : S.C. GUPTE, J.

¶22

 DATED: 21 FEBRUARY, 2020

¶23

P.C. :

¶24

.These two petitions challenge a common order passed by
Apex Grievance Redressal Committee (AGRC) under Sections 33 and 38

¶25

Pg 1 of 4

¶26

wpl246&247-20.doc

¶27

of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance And
Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (“Act”). After the matter is heard at length,
it is agreed between learned Counsel for the Petitioners, who claim to be
eligible slum dwellers, and learned Counsel appearing for Respondent
No.5, who is the developer of the subject SR project, and Respondent
No.2 - SRA, that the writ petition may be disposed of in terms of the
following order.

¶28

2.It is accordingly ordered as follows:

¶29

(i)Petitioner No.3 in Writ Petition (L) No.246 of 2020 has
already been declared to be an eligible slum dweller entitled to get
permanent alternative accommodation in lieu of his tenement free of
cost on ownership basis in the rehab building of Respondent No.5 as
part of the subject SR project. Permanent alternative accommodation
shall, accordingly, be allotted to him and appropriate arrangement shall
be made for payment of interim transit rent to him.

¶30

(ii)So far as Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 in Writ Petition (L) No.246
of 2020 are concerned, their eligibility is pending consideration before
Deputy Collector (Western Suburbs), SRA. Subject to such eligibility
being determined in the proceedings, Respondent No.5 developer has
agreed to provide them with permanent alternative accommodation and
also interim transit rent. Till their eligibility is decided in the
proceeding, interim transit rent shall be paid by Respondent No.5 to
Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2, as provided hereinbelow.

¶31

Pg 2 of 4

¶32

wpl246&247-20.doc

¶33

(iii)In Writ Petition (L) No.247 of 2020, eligibility of all three
Petitioners is pending consideration before Deputy Collector (Western
Suburbs), SRA. Subject to their eligibility being accepted by the
Deputy Collector, Respondent No.5 developer shall allot permanent
alternative accommodation and also transit rent to these Petitioners as
provided hereinbelow. Pending consideration of their application for
eligibility, interim transit rent, as provided hereinbelow, shall be paid by
Respondent No.5 to these Petitioners.

¶34

(iv)The issue of correct interim transit rent payable by
Respondent No.5 to eligible slum dwellers including the Petitioners
herein in accordance with this order shall be left by the parties to
Assistant Registrar, SRA for determination.

¶35

(v)Once the interim transit rent is determined by Assistant
Registrar, SRA, eligible slum dwellers, including the Petitioners herein,
in terms of this order, may apply to the Department of Co-operation,
SRA for withdrawal of amounts deposited by Respondent No.5 towards
such rent. Respondent No.5 shall co-operate in the matter of
disbursement by appearing before the authorities and submitting
appropriate documents. Whilst determining such compensation,
Assistant Registrar, SRA shall hear both parties before deciding the
matter.

¶36

(vi)It is made clear that even if eligibility of any of Petitioner
Nos. 1 and 2 in Writ Petition (L) No.246 of 2020 or of any of the
Petitioners in Writ Petition (L) No.247 of 2020 is decided against them,

¶37

Pg 3 of 4

¶38

wpl246&247-20.doc

¶39

Respondent No.5 developer shall not seek refund of any amount of
interim transit rent paid to them in accordance with this order.

¶40

(vii)The Petitioners in both petitions shall handover their
respective tenements to Respondent No.5 for the purposes of the subject
SR project within a period of four weeks from today.

¶41

(viii)All parties to appear before Assistant Registrar, SRA, when
either party may produce an authenticated copy of this order on 28
February 2020.

¶42

(ix)Assistant Registrar, SRA shall decide the quantum of interim
transit rent as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of
four weeks from today.

¶43

(x)The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly.

¶44

Smita Gonsalves

¶45

Digitally signed by Smita Gonsalves Date: 2020.03.02 17:17:15 +0530

¶46

( S.C. GUPTE, J. )

¶47

Pg 4 of 4

Khan Maksudali Samiullah and 2 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khan Maksudali Samiullah and 2 Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and 4 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

Gundecha Onclave Premises Co-Operative Society Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

Ankita Industries through Proprietor Mrs. A.A. Doshi and Anr. Vs Ramashray Mulchand Singh and Anr.

Sagar Chavan Vs Navabharat Press Ltd. and Anr.

Qureshi Mohd. Salim Hadis and 2 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Sedretary and 4 Ors.

Pooja Vijay Rane Vs Returning Officer (Dy.Registrar C.S),R-S Ward Mumbai and 14 Ors.

Bai Zaverbai Purshottam Nathu Charitable Trust Vs the Charity Commissioner Maharashtra State and Anr.