Bombay High Court
ABHIJIT A. DUDWADKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH GOVT. PLEADER
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The court directed the Assistant Engineer (TP), G/South Ward Office of MCGM to decide the petitioner's eligibility representation within eight weeks and disposed of the petition.
Summary
The petitioner, an occupant of a hut slated for demolition under a Letter of Intent issued by the Deputy Chief Engineer of the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (S.R.A.), sought a declaration of his eligibility for accommodation as mandated by clause 14 of that letter. He filed a writ petition challenging the demolition and requesting the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) to decide his eligibility. The court examined the terms of the Letter of Intent, particularly the requirement to accommodate huts cut along the demarcated plot boundary. Finding that the relief sought required a determination by the competent municipal authority, the court directed the Assistant Engineer (TP) of the South Ward Office, MCGM, to decide the petitioner's representation within eight weeks. The petition was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is eligible for accommodation of the hut being cut as per clause 14 of the Letter of Intent dated 3 November 2007.
- Whether the court may direct the municipal authority to decide the petitioner's representation within a specified time.
Subjects
- Writ Petition
- Housing Rehabilitation
- Municipal Corporation
- Eligibility
- Demarcation
- Slum Rehabilitation Authority
- Letter of Intent
Judgment
34. WP 699-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.699 OF 2024
Abhijit A. Dudwadkar … Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra
Through Government Pleader … Respondent
…..
Adv. Aseem Naphade a/w Adv. Haamid Ahmad for Petitioner.
Smt. Vrushali Kabre, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1-State.
Adv. Yashi Bhatt i/b Mr. Ravleen Sabharwal for Respondent-S.R.A.
Ms. Jyoti Mhatre i/b Smt. Komal Punjabi for Respondent No.3-
MCGM.
…..
CORAM: M.S. KARNIK &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATED : 16th SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner as well as for S.R.A.
and MCGM.
2. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has invited our attention
to the Letter of Intent dated 3 rd November 2007, issued by Deputy
Chief Engineer, S.R.A. Clauses 13 and 14, reads thus :-
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 1/3
34. WP 699-2024.doc
“13. That you shall get the plot boundaries demarcated and the
compound wall shall be constructed prior to commencing
building works and the same shall be certified by the concerned
Architect before requesting for C.C. beyond the plinth level.
14. That you shall accommodate the huts getting cut along with the
boundary of the plot demarcated by the staff of the City survey
office.”
3. The learned Counsel submits that the Petitioner is one of the
occupants of the hut which was getting cut along the boundary of the
plot demarcated by the staff of the City Survey Office in terms of
clause 14.
4. The Petitioner, therefore, through his Advocate made a
representation to the MCGM as well as S.R.A. for deciding his
eligibility.
5. Considering the nature of relief in the Petition, we direct the
Competent Authority, i.e. the Assistant Engineer (TP), G/South Ward
Office of the MCGM to decide the representation dated 20 th
September 2023, which is at page 117 of the Petition, and in any
case within a period of eight weeks of date of communication of this
Order.
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 2/3
34. WP 699-2024.doc
6. The Petition stands disposed of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M.S. KARNIK, J.)
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 3/3
Digitally signed
RAJESH by RAJESH
VASANT
VASANT CHITTEWAN
CHITTEWAN Date: 2026.09.17
13:22:24 +0530
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.