Quashed

Vilas Dhaku Parab v. Grievances Redressal Committee

Bombay HC19 Jun 2024WP/2171/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed impugned orders dismissing an appeal against slum rehabilitation authorities solely on the ground of non-filing of delay condonation application. Reliant on documentary evidence of possession since 1995, the Court remanded the matter to the Additional Collector to decide the delay condonation application and the appeal on merits.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders quashed; appeal remanded to Additional Collector for decision on delay condonation and merits.

Vilas Dhaku Parab vs Grievances Redressal… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

52-WP-2171-2024.doc

¶2

Arjun

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2171 OF 2024

¶5

Vilas Dhaku Parab Versus

¶6

Grievance Redressal Committee & Ors.

¶7

…Petitioner

¶8

…Respondents

¶9

Ms. Archana Gaikwad, for the Petitioner.

¶10

Ms. Uma Palsuledesai, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 & 2-State. Ms. P. H. Kantharia, for the Respondent No.6-SRA.

¶11

CORAM: MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATED: 01 JULY 2024

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

Heard Ms. Gaikwad, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner,

¶14

Ms. Palsuledesai, learned AGP appearing for Respondent Nos.1 and 2, and Ms. Kantharia, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.6.

¶15

Ms. Gaikwad, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that all Respondents have been served and affidavit of service has already been filed.

¶16

Ms. Gaikwad, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submitted that the slum structure which is subject matter of the Writ Petition is occupied by the Petitioner. She submitted that one Dilip Babaji Khopde was the previous occupant and the Petitioner had purchased the said slum structure from him in the year 1994. She submitted that the Petitioner is in possession of various documents

¶17

¶18

52-WP-2171-2024.doc

¶19

including that his name is shown in the voters list for the year 1995, Electricity Meter/Bill issued in his name since 23rd October 1996, a receipt of Slum Survey 2000 also is in favour of the Petitioner as well as Aadhaar Card and Ration Card stand in the name of the Petitioner. She submitted that her Appeal bearing No.1854 of 2018 was dismissed only on the ground that no Application for delay condonation was filed. She submitted that there are sufficient grounds for delay condonation as the Petitioner was not aware that name of Dilip Babaji Khopde was shown in Annexure-II.

¶20

In view of these contentions, as the documentary evidence since the year 1995 shows that the Petitioner is in possession of the property and as a receipt regarding Slum Survey 2000 is in favour of the Petitioner, without going into their merits, the impugned Orders dated 6th June 2019 passed by the Respondent No.2-Additional Collector and Appellate Authority as well as Order dated 23rd November 2022 passed by the Respondent No.1-Grievance Redressal Committee, Mumbai Suburban are quashed and set aside.

¶21

Accordingly, said Appeal No.1854 of 2018 is remanded back to the Additional Collector and Appellate Authority, Mumbai Suburban District.

¶22

The Petitioner to appear before concerned Additional Collector and Appellate Authority, Mumbai Suburban District on 22nd July 2024.

¶23

¶24

52-WP-2171-2024.doc

¶25

On that day, the Petitioner to file delay condonation Application in said Appeal No.1854 of 2018.

¶26

The Respondent No.2-Additional Collector and Appellate Authority, is requested to decide the said delay condonation Application

¶27

as well as Appeal No.1854 of 2018 on or before 30th September 2023.

¶28

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶29

It is clarified that this Court has not considered the merits and all

¶30

contentions on merits are expressly kept open.

¶31

[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]

¶32

Vilas Dhaku Parab v. Grievances Redressal Committee

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vilas Dhaku Parab v. Grievances Redressal Committee

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ganpati Tayappa Wadar (Chavan) vs Ramchandra Tayappa Wadar ( Chavan), Since Deceased through Legal Heirs

Ganpati Tayappa Wadar vs Ramchandra Tayappa Wadar (Chavan), Deceased through Legal Heirs

Siddharth Sudesh Kumar Sabharwal vs Arzoo S. Govitrikar

Garodia Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. vs District Deputy Registrar Co-Operative Society (2), Eastern Suburbs, Mumbai

Anurag Goel vs Chhavi Anurag Goel and Anr.

Manish Dhirajlal Parmar vs the District Deputy Registrar Co-Opertive Societies,Mumbai