Zahir Shah M. Ansari vs State of Maharashtra through Office of the Government Pleader

“(a) this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction and order, thereby directing the Respondent No.4 to Revoke the order dated 22.10.2024 and restore the cancellation of NOCs dated 20.08.2024.

¶18

b)this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent No. 4 to take appropriate steps to acquire and complete the

¶19

Page 1 of 3

¶20

Laxmi

¶21

This order is modifed as per speaking to the minutes of the order dated 21^st November 2025.

¶22

16 WP 2602-25 SPEAKING ORDER.DOC

¶23

redevelopment project of Allarakhia Building situated at 586 - 598 Bapurao Jagtap Marg, Saath Rastha, Mumbai 400011.

¶24

(c) this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to conduct joint enquiry in respect of complaints against the Respondent No. 6 committing several illegalities, irregularities, including illegal and unauthorized construction/demolition in respect of redevelopment project of Allarakhia Building situated at 586 598 Bapurao Jagtap Marg, Saath Rastha, Mumbai 400011 and to take action in accordance with law.

¶25

(d) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the Respondent No. 6 to immediately make payment of arrears of temporary alternate accommodation to the Petitioners;

¶26

(e) pending the hearing and final disposal of the petition, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay the Order dated 22.12.2024 passed by the Respondent No. 4.

¶27

(f) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the petition, the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 be restrained by an order and injunction to modify the sanctioned plan without knowledge, consent and permission of the tenants/occupants of said Allarekha Building and/or newly developed building thereon.

¶28

(g) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the petition, the Respondent No. 6 be directed to pay the monthly compensation towards temporary alternate accommodation to the Petitioners.

¶29

(h) for ad-interim reliefs in terms of prayer clause (e) to (g) during the pendency of this petition;

¶30

(i) for costs of this Petition;”

¶31

It appears that there is some dispute in regard to Petitioner No.1’s occupation in respect of the tenement in question as it is the contention of Petitioner No.1 that the original tenant of the said tenement was the mother of Petitioner No.1. It is contended that the mother of Petitioner No.1 has been granted three new flats. Petitioner No.1 appears to have received the possession of the New Flat No. 1004 from his mother. He has several grievances against MHADA as also the Municipal Corporation in regard to the construction.

¶32

Page 2 of 3

¶33

Laxmi

¶34

This order is modifed as per speaking to the minutes of the order dated 21^st November 2025.

¶35

16 WP 2602-25 SPEAKING ORDER.DOC

¶36

The learned Counsel for Respondent No.6-mother submits that the Petitioners have no locus to maintain such grievances.

¶37

It appears that there are disputes inter-se between the family members. However, these are not the proceedings in which we can decide any inter-se rights of the Petitioner and his mother as also any issue under any family settlement.

¶38

Any complaints which are made before the authority are pending, let the same be decided in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from today. All contentions in that regard are expressly kept open including the contentions of private Respondents that the Petitioners have no locus to maintain such grievances.

¶39

The Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

¶40

(AARTI SATHE, J.)

¶41

Page 3 of 3

¶42

Laxmi This order is modifed as per speaking to the minutes of the order dated 21^st November 2025.

Zahir Shah M. Ansari v. State of Maharashtra through Office of the Government Pleader

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zahir Shah M. Ansari v. State of Maharashtra through Office of the Government Pleader

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vilas Dhondu Chavan vs State of Maharashtra through the Office of Government Pleader, Original Side Writ Cell

Sandhya Ashok Dhumal vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary

Captain Vilas Waman Katre vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Central Range 7

Kishor Janu Sakpal vs the State of Maharashtra

Bipin Lilaram Limbancha vs the State of Maharashtra through the Office of Gp O.S. Bombay and Ors.

Shamim Momin Qureshi vs the State of Maharashtra