The Chief Executive Officer Mumbai Board Mhada And 3 ORS. v. Shanta Mallanna Rikkal

913-RPWL.32.2017.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (L) NO. 32 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 688 OF 2016 The Chief Executive Officer } Mumbai Board-MHADA } and Ors.

} Petitioners versus Shanta Mallanna Rikkal } Respondent Mr. Prakash G. Lad for the petitioners.

Ms. Usha Purohit for the respondent.

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ.

DATED :- NOVEMBER 24, 2017 P.C. :- 1.

Having heard both sides and finding that there is no error of law apparent on the face of the record nor are the parameters enabling us to interfere in review jurisdiction satisfied, we dispose of this review petition. Once the court directs allotment of a tenement to the widow of the original ex-servicemen, then, irrespective of how she applies or the category that she mentions in her application, the order has to be complied with. Meaning thereby, only one tenement has to be allotted to the petitioner. The authorities need not insist on the petitioner now making any application and mentioning a specific category as the order under review is clear.

J.V.Salunke,PA

913-RPWL.32.2017.doc 2.

Mr. Lad states on instructions that within a period of two weeks from today, the order under review will be given effect to and implemented. We accept this statement as an undertaking given to this court.

(DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.) J.V.Salunke,PA