Mohammed Sharfuddin Shaikh v. The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai
RVC 23 Wp-4198-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4198 OF 2024 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.30293 OF 2024 Mohammed Sharfuddin Sheikh ... Petitioner V/s.
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.
... Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.30293 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION NO.4198 OF 2024 Neel Shantiniketan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
... Applicant In the matter between :
Mohammed Sheikh Sharfuddin ... Petitioner V/s.
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.
... Respondents _____________________________________ Mr. Aditya Lele a/w Ms. Aishwarya Gaikwad for Applicant. Ms. R.M. Hajare i/b Adv. Komal Punjabi for Respondent No.1-MCGM. Mr. Naushad Engineer, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Aadil Parsurampuria, Mr. Tejas Agarwal i/b IC Legal for Respondent No.3. _____________________________________ CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
DATE : 15th October 2024.
1/3
RVC 23 Wp-4198-2024.doc P.C. :
1) Present Petition is heard for some time. Taking into consideration the controversy involved in the present Petition, when this Court called upon the learned counsel for the MCGM, she sought time to take instructions.
2) Record indicates that, present Petition is filed on 22nd August 2024 and a copy of the Petition is served upon the MCGM on 28th August 2024. Despite the said fact, the concerned Officers of the MCGM did not take pains to give necessary instructions to their counsel in time and it is the reason, she is unable to assist this Court in adjudicating the Petition. 3) We have came across with several cases, wherein the concerned Officers of the MCGM are not giving instructions to their standing counsel/Advocates appearing before the Court and it is the reason that, though the Court is willing to take up the Petition(s) for hearing, it is unable to do so.
4) In view of the above, we deem it appropriate to bring the said fact to the notice of the Additional Municipal Commissioner (City), who as per the instructions of the learned counsel for the MCGM, is having charge to take care of the entire litigation by or against the MCGM within the jurisdiction of this Court. We request the concerned Additional Municipal Commissioner (City) to take into consideration the aforesaid facts noted by 2/3
RVC 23 Wp-4198-2024.doc us and adopt appropriate remedial measures in that behalf. 5) Taking into consideration the controversy involved in the present Petition and reports submitted by the different Assistant Commissioners, we deem it appropriate to direct the Additional Municipal Commissioner (Western Region) of the MCGM, to file a detailed Reply to the Petition. 5.1) This be done on or before 21st November 2024. 6) Stand over to 22nd November 2024.
( KAMAL KHATA, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. ) by RAJESH VASANT CHITTEWAN Date: 2024.10.22 10:50:56 +0530 RAJESH VASANT CHITTEWAN 3/3