Allowed

Mrs. Sarala Shantilal Muttha v. Pune Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Bombay HC11 Oct 2021WP/3988/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed seeking a mandamus to enforce notices for removal of unauthorized structures blocking road access. Writ petition allowed with a direction that the respondent shall act within three months and police shall assist if required. Intervention applications disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; Police to co-operate if respondent requires assistance; Response to remove structures expected within 3 months.

Mrs. Sarala Shantilal Muttha Vs Pune Municipal Corporation… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

1/3

¶2

12-wp-3988-2021.doc

¶3

Digitally signed by UDAY UDAY PRABHAKAR PRABHAKAR KAMBLI KAMBLI Date: 2021.10.13 11:05:28 +0530

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.3988 OF 2021 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2817 OF 2021 AND INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2818 OF 2021 AND INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2819 OF 2021

¶6

AND INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO.19416 OF 2021 (FOR INTERVENTION) IN WRIT PETITION NO.3988 OF 2021

¶7

... Mrs. Sarala Shantilal Muttha ...Petitioner Versus Pune Municipal Corporation & Ors. ...Respondents

¶8

Mr.R.D.Soni i/b. Ram & Co. for the Petitioner. Mr.R.M.Pethe for the Respondent -Corporation. Mr.Akshay Arun Deshmukh i/b. Mr. Choudhari for the Applicant/Intervenor.

¶9

CORAM : A.A. SAYED & S.G.DIGE, JJ. DATED : 11 OCTOBER 2021

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

The Petition is filed seeking the following relief:

¶12

“(a)This Hon’ble Court may issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ in the nature of mandamus to the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to implement and enforce the notices dated 3-3-2021 issued under section 52 and 53 of th MRTP Act, 1966 for removal of the unauthorized and illegal structures that have blocked the 15 meter DP Road and consequently blocked the only access to the Petitioner’s

1/3

Uday.P.Kambli

2/3

12-wp-3988-2021.doc

land being survey No.258 as more particularly described in the plan annexed as Exh.E hereinabove.”

¶18

The Respondent-Corporation has filed Affidavit-in-Reply. In paras XIX and XXII it has been stated as follows:

¶19

“XIX. On or about 6^th September 2021, the Deputy Engineer P.M.C.Zone No.4 rejected the replies/explanations submitted by the owners of the unauthorised structures as the owners did not submit any permission/commencement certificate to the said structures.

¶20

XXII. … I say that P.M.C. will require approximately 3 months time to take action of removal of the unauthorised structures for implementing the sanctioned Development Plan in regard to the 15 meter Development Plan Road passing through S.No.260 of village Lohgaon. I say that P.M.C. is in the process of issuing notices under section 268 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 for vacating the building.”

¶21

In view of the above, no further orders are required to be passed in the Petition. Accepting the statements of the Respondent-Corporation in

¶22

the Affidavit-in-Reply, we dispose of the Petition. If the RespondentCorporation requires the assistance of the police, the concerned Police Station shall co-operate.

2/3

Uday.P.Kambli

3/3

12-wp-3988-2021.doc

So far as Interim Applications for intervention are concerned, we

¶28

make it clear that remedies of the Applicants to file independent proceedings are kept open. The Interim Applications to stand disposed of.

¶29

(S.G.DIGE,J.) (A.A.SAYED, J.)

¶30

3/3

¶31

Uday.P.Kambli

Mrs. Sarala Shantilal Muttha v. Pune Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Sarala Shantilal Muttha v. Pune Municipal Corporation and 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

Harry Joseph Francis Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Mr. Amit Bajirao Tambe Vs Mrs. Poonam Amit Tambe

Prabhudayal Shyamdev Arya Vs the Commissioner Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Kishen H. Dhingra and 3 Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 8 Ors.

Greenviro Infratech Pvt.Ltd. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

Ganesh Vitthal Nakhate Vs Bombay Municipal Corporation