Ms. Jasmine Nozer Irani Through Her General Poa Holder v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Dept. Of Urban Development And ORS.

Sr. No. 40 WP 1452 of 2019.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1452 OF 2019 ALONG WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1299 OF 2019 Savitri Bhalchandra Ambhire & Ors.

... Applicants In the matter between Ms. Jasmine Nozer Irani Through her General Power of Attorney Holder - Pravin Nozer Irani ... Petitioner Vs The State of Maharashtra Through the Department of Urban Development & Ors.

... Respondents Mr. P.M. Arjunwadkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Sachin S. Punde, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. Y.S. Khochare, AGP for State.

CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ DATE : AUGUST 28 th , 2019 P.C.:

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner attempts to demonstrate that after long drawn legal battle, which has reached upto Hon'ble Apex Court, at the stage of passing of decree and thereafter at the stage of execution, when eviction from petitioner's property became imminent; Municipal Council with oblique motive is resorting to MRTP Act 1966 and is attempting to fasten the reservation for fish Prachi Potdar 1/2

Sr. No. 40 WP 1452 of 2019.odt market upon development plan.

2.

Learned counsel for the intervenor, who has moved Civil Application No. 1299 of 2019 has opposed this contention. Learned AGP points out that the Notification proposing reservation appears to have been issued on 04.04.2012 and further steps in the matter are not brought on record.

3.

Reservation of a site in development plan and the execution of the decree in his favour by the petitioner are two distinct aspects, not having any bearing on each other.

4.

Petitioner has already objected to the proposed reservation and he has not received any intimation about its consideration or rejection. Petitioner has also not placed on record any final development plan under Section 31(6) of MRTP Act pointing out that said reservation has been finally fastened. 5.

In this view of matter, we keep the contention of the petitioner open and with liberty to petitioner to approach again if any cause of action arises, we dispose of the petition.

6.

Civil Application is disposed of accordingly. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.) (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) Prachi Potdar 2/2