KANTI BUILDERS PVT LTDversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                                        907-WP-1647-2026 (OS).odt

         Ashwini

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                            ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

ASHWINI
PRASAD
                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 1647 OF 2026
NARHIRE

Digitally signed
by ASHWINI
PRASAD
NARHIRE
Date:
2026.10.09
11:12:41 +0530


                   Kanti Builders Pvt Ltd.                             ...Petitioner
                           Versus
                   State Of Maharashtra & Anr.                         ...Respondents
                                                ...
                   Mr. Pravin Samdani, Sr. Advocate a/w Saket Mone, Mr. Archit
                   Rao, Ms. Aashka Vora i/b. Vidhii Partners for the Petitioner.

                   Smt. Usha Rahi, AGP for the Respondent No.1 - State.

                   Ms. Sheetal Metakari i/b. Komal Punjabi for Respondent Nos.2
                   and 3 – BMC.
                                                     ...

                               CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
                                       ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.

                               DATE      : 7th OCTOBER, 2026.


                   P.C.:
                   1.      We have heard Mr. Samdani, learned Senior Advocate for

                   Petitioner, Smt. Usha Rahi, AGP for Respondent No.1-State

                   and Ms. Sheetal Metakari for Respondent Nos.2 and 3-BMC.

                   The instant Writ Petition is preferred inter alia for the following

                   substantive relief:

                        “a)    That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of



                                                     1 of 1
                                                     907-WP-1647-2026 (OS).odt


     Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction
     under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the
     Respondents Nos.2 & 3 to grant two times TDR-FSI in the
     form of TDR by issuing DRC or in the alternative monetary
     compensation in accordance with the said Act in lieu of
     land and constructed amenity towards Nalla widening
     land admeasuring approximately about (4152.30 sq. mtr.)
     including existing Nallah on the plot of land bearing CTS
     No.374/B/6 situated at Village Eksar, Borivali (West),
     Mumbai – 400092, in favour of the Petitioner, in accordance
     with law.”

2.    At the outset, Mr. Samdani has placed reliance on the

communication issued by BMC dated 30th September 2025

regarding grant of Development Right Certificate (“DRC”) in

lieu of Nalla training and widening along with construction of

nalla on land bearing C.T.S. No.374 B/6 of village Eksar

Borivali (W) in R/Central Ward. He would further submit that

the Three Member Committee had accepted the request made

by the Architect S.G. Kanade for grant of TDR, subject to the

fulfillment of the following conditions:-

     (i)    Issuance      of     Completion        Certificate           for

     construction/training of nalla from SWD Department.

     (ii)   Joint measurement by CTSO for land affected by

     nalla.


                                  2 of 2
                                                907-WP-1647-2026 (OS).odt


     (ii)     Taking over the land affected by nalla by SWD

     department and further transfer of PRC in the name of

     BMC.

3.   In so far as the first condition is concerned, Mr. Samdani

has relied upon Completion Certificate appended at page

nos.75-76 of the paper book. As regards to the second and

third conditions, he submits the Petitioner shall make an

Application within one week’s time and expect/requests the

matter be expedited.

4.   At this stage dispute is raised with regard to the

Completion Certificate appended at (page nos.75 and 76) of the

Petition. In this context, Mr. Samdani would submit that this is

a Full Completion Certificate as against the submission of the

Respondent-Corporation such certificate is Part Completion

Certificate. Be that as it may, this aspect can be examined by

the Respondent Corporation and in case there is any shortfall

and or clarifications required, the same shall be sought by the

Petitioner.

5.   Per contra, Ms. Metakari, the learned counsel for

Respondent Corporation would submit that the Three Member



                              3 of 3
                                                  907-WP-1647-2026 (OS).odt


Committee vide communication dated 30th September, 2025

has accepted the request for grant of TDR subject to aforesaid

conditions. She further stated that upon the Petitioner

completing the necessary formalities the Competent Authority

shall expeditiously process the Petitioner’s Application and

take all consequential steps in accordance with the law.

6.   In case the Petitioner prefers an Application within 10

days qua the second and third conditions indicated in the

communication dated 30th September 2025 noted (supra), we

expect the Respondent/Concerned Authority to do the needful

expeditiously in accordance with law, within two months from

the date of uploading of this order. As observed above in doing

so, the Respondent/Concerned Authority shall also examine

the issue/dispute regarding to the Full/Part Completion

Certificate (at pages 75-76) of the Petition.

7.   Accordingly, the Petition stands Disposed Of in the above

terms.




[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]                          [CHIEF JUSTICE]




                                4 of 4