Yusuf Jainul Rajkotwala And ANR v. State Of Maharashtra And 7 ORS

10. os wp 2260-18.doc R.M. AMBERKAR (Private Secretary)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

O.O.C.J.

Ravindra M.

Amberkar WRIT PETITION NO. 2260 OF 2018 by Ravindra M.

Amberkar Date: 2019.10.17 10:47:05 +0530 Yusuf Jainul Rajkotwala & Anr.

..

Petitioners

Versus

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

..

Respondents ...................

 Mr. Arshit Shah a/w Ms. Sneha Vani for the Petitioners  Mr. Himanshu Takke with Mrs. Jyoti Chavan, AGP for Respondent No. 1 - State  Mr. Akshay Kulkarni for Respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6  Ms. Yamuna Parekh for Respondent No. 3 ...................

CORAM : AKIL KURESHI & S.J. KATHAWALLA, JJ.

DATE : OCTOBER 16, 2019.

P.C.:

1.

To meet the concerns of the petitioner about the nature of repairs required to be and being carried out in the building in question, we had given certain interim directions. Learned counsel for the contractor prayed for additional one month's time for completing the work. Learned counsel for the Corporation, however, submitted that the Corporation would like to verify whether the repair work is as per the building regulations and unauthorized construction has been carried out. Let the repair work be continued and be completed

10. os wp 2260-18.doc within six weeks from today. Upon completion of the work, the MHADA Architect would verify the quality of work carried out and submit a report before the registry with a copy to the concerned parties. We are informed that the building belongs to MHADA. MHADA would also satisfy all requirements of the Corporation. It would be open for the Corporation to verify that the repaired building satisfies all building rules and regulations.

2.

With these observations and directions, the petition is disposed of.

[ S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. ] [ AKIL KURESHI, J ]