Farzan Mohd. Umar Ansari vs the State of Maharashtra through Govt. Pleader (Original Side)

Respondents to produce the files with respect to the approvals given for the redevelopment of the Bharat Nagar Camp and after perusal of the same this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the same being malafide, arbitrary and illegal;

¶26

c. That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction of Mandamus or any writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus and be pleased to direct the Respondents to

¶27

d. That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to Issue a Writ, order or direction of Certiorari or any writ, Order or Direction in the nature of Certiorari and be pleased to quash and set aside the Letter of Intent / Offer letter dated 24.09.2020 & Revised Offer Letter dated 11.08.2021 granted to the Respondent Developer by the Respondent MHADA for the redevelopment of the Bharat Nagar Transit Camp”.

¶28

Learned Senior Advocate for Respondent No.5–Developer submitted that there is a gross delay on the part of the Petitioner in approaching this Court. It is submitted that the buildings are completed.

¶29

The Petitioner was the occupant of the MHADA Transit Camp. It is the contention of the Petitioner that there is a large scale fraud in

Satish Sangar

2/4

22-WP-3768-2025.doc

respect of the payment of the ready reckoner rates concerning the plots on which the buildings have been constructed by the Respondent No.5–Developer. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submitted that though several representations have been made to the State Government, no action has been taken on such representations. The Petitioner has tendered representation dated 24^th July 2023 which has been addressed to the Chief Secretary, Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai alleging various illegalities in the matter of redevelopment of Bharat Nagar Transit Camp by the Respondent No.5.

¶34

Shri.Aspi Chinoy, learned Senior Advocate submitted that the redevelopment is complete and once the occupation certificate is obtained, the Petitioner as well as other occupants will be put in possession.

¶35

Considering the delay in filing the Petition, we are not inclined to entertain the present Petition at the instance of the present Petitioners. This Petition is more in nature of public interest without any material particulars as to the locus of the Petitioner and other details. However, it is open for the Petitioner to pursue the representation made by him to the Government of Maharashtra on

Satish Sangar

3/4

22-WP-3768-2025.doc

24^th July 2023. It is open for the Chief Secretary or the Complaint Officer authorized to look into the representation and initiate appropriate action,if the State Government finds any substance therein, in accordance with law.

¶40

Subject to the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

¶41

(S. M. MODAK, J.)

¶42

(M. S. KARNIK, J.)

¶43

Satish Sangar

¶44

4/4

Farzan Mohd. Umar Ansari v. the State of Maharashtra through Govt. Pleader (Original Side)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Farzan Mohd. Umar Ansari v. the State of Maharashtra through Govt. Pleader (Original Side)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Noor Saba Firoz Khan and Anr. vs Late Jeet Bhikarao through (LoA) Sayed Muntazir Mehdi and 6 Ors.

Avtar Singh Sethi vs State of Maharashtra through Government Pleader (O.S.)

Avtar Singh Sethi vs State of Maharashtra through Government Pleader (O.S.)

Jaskaran Singh Dayal Singh Anand vs S P Associates, Builders and Developers

Sushine Builders and Developers a Partnership Firm vs the Chief Executive Officer Slum Rehabilitation Authority

Rajesh Mohanalal Rathod vs the State of Maharashtra through the Government Pleader