Disposed

Kapil Mahendra Sharma v. Commissioner, Thane Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Feb 2021WP/4155/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition for allotment of a plot. The respondents undertook to remove encroachments via public notice and allot the plot within a year. The court also directed consideration of a representation regarding nullah alignment.

What did the court decide?

Acceptance of respondent's undertaking for allotment within a year after encroachment removal; direction to issue public notice within two weeks and consider nullah alignment representation.

Kapil Mahendra Sharma Vs Commissioner, Thane Municipal… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

4-WP.4155.2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 4155 OF 2018 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3467 OF 2020

¶4

Kapil Mahendra Sharma	} Petitioner
Versus
Commissioner, Thane	}
Municipal Corporation and Ors.	} Respondents

¶5

Mr.Atul Damle-Senior Advocate i/b. Mr.Amol P. Mhatre for the petitioner.

¶6

Mr.Mandar Limaye for the Municipal Corporation.

¶7

Mr.P.P.Kakade-Government Pleader with Ms.R.A.Salunkhe-AGP for State.

¶8

Mr.Sunil Patil-Executive Engineer present.

¶9

CORAM :- DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ & G. S. KULKARNI, J.

¶10

DATE :- FEBRUARY 18, 2021

¶11

PC :-

¶12

1. The principal relief claimed in this writ petition is for a direction on the Thane Municipal Corporation to allot vacant, peaceful and legal possession of final plot no. 44, admeasuring 813.78 square meters (hereafter “the said plot”) in favour of the petitioner, free from all encumbrances.

Page 1 of 3

J.V.Salunke,PS

4-WP.4155.2018

2. Mr.Limaye, learned advocate for the Municipal Corporation does not dispute the entitlement of the petitioner to have an allotment in respect of the said plot. However, it is submitted by him that the said plot is not free from encumbrances. There are at least 17 unauthorized structures and an unauthorized temple on such plot and that the Municipal Corporation proposes to issue a public notice and thereafter, take the proceedings to its logical conclusion for removal of all such encroachments.

¶17

3. Reacting to a query of the Court, Mr.Limaye, on instructions of Mr.Sunil Patil, the Executive Engineer of the Municipal Corporation, who is present in Court, submits that earnest endeavour would be made to allot the said plot in favour of the petitioner within a year from date of issuance of such public notice.

¶18

4. Mr.Damle, learned senior advocate for the petitioner submits that since he has been awaiting allotment of the said plot since 1995, he would be satisfied if the aforesaid assurance given on behalf of the Municipal Corporation by Mr.Limaye is honoured and allotment is made within a year of issuance of the public notice.

¶19

5. Mr.Damle also makes a grievance with regard to a ‘nullah’ that is being excavated in the vicinity of the said plot and makes a prayer for a direction to the Municipal Corporation to decide the representation made by the petitioner seeking change of alignment of such nullah.

Page 2 of 3

J.V.Salunke,PS

4-WP.4155.2018

6. Mr.Limaye does not seriously oppose the prayer and submits that such representation shall be duly considered in accordance with law.

¶24

7. In view of the aforesaid submissions, we dispose of this writ petition with the following order:

¶25

(i) The statement of Mr.Limaye that earnest endeavour would be made to remove the encroachments on the said plot and that allotment thereof would be made in favour of the petitioner within a year of issuance of the public notice is accepted;

¶26

(ii) The public notice may be issued within two weeks from date;

¶27

(iii) Once the encroachments are removed, the Municipal Corporation shall not waste any further time to issue the letter of allotment in favour of the petitioner; and

¶28

(iv) The representation made by the petitioner seeking change of alignment of the nullah shall be considered by the same Executive Engineer of the Municipal Corporation upon granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and such representation shall be disposed of by a reasoned order within eight weeks from date.

¶29

8. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶30

9. In view of the aforesaid order, the interim application stands disposed of.

¶31

Jayant V. Salunke

¶32

(G. S. KULKARNI, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶33

Digitally signed by Jayant V. Salunke Date: 2021.02.18 19:00:30 +0530

¶34

Page 3 of 3

¶35

J.V.Salunke,PS

Kapil Mahendra Sharma v. Commissioner, Thane Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kapil Mahendra Sharma v. Commissioner, Thane 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hadapsar Industrial Estate Environmental Group Vs the Pune Cantonment Board and Ors.

Shri. Pradip Namdev Gowari Vs the State of Maharashtra through Ministry of Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Parmanand Jaywant Koli and Ors. Vs Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust and Ors.

Ramesh Gurdasmal Chandiramani Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Narayan Shivram Kamble and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sandeep Raman Pawar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Chief Secretary and Ors.