UDHARAM AMMUMAL PARWANIversusUNION OF INDIA and ORS.

2026:BHC-AS:39986

              Megha                                                14_WP_8065_2004


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                 WRIT PETITION NO.8065 OF 2004

              Udharam Ammumal Parwani since
              deceased through legal heirs-
              1. Pushpa w/o. Udharam A. Parwani
              and Ors.                                           ...Petitioners

                                V/s.

              Union of India through the General
              Manager, Central Railway, Mumbai and
              Ors.                                               ...Respondents
                                            ________________
              Mr. Hitesh P. Vyas with Mr. Rasik Raut for the Petitioners.
              Mr. R.V. Govilkar, Senior Advocate with Mr. T.J. Pandian, Mr. R.P. Ojha,
              Mr. T.C. Subramanian, Mr. Gautam Modanwal, Ms. Vaishali Barot. Ms.
              Noorjahan Khan and Ms. Aarti Gupta for the Respondents.
                                            ________________


                                                     CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

                                                      DATED: 30 SEPTEMBER 2026.


              P.C.:


              1)      Petition challenges judgment and order dated 10 September
              2004 passed by the learned Principal Judge, City Civil Court at Mumbai
              dismissing Misc. Appeal No.209 of 2001. In his Appeal filed before the
              City Civil Court, the Petitioner had challenged order dated 21 March
              2001 passed by the Estate Officer, Central Railway in Case No.165 of 1998



                                               Page No.1 of 6
                                             30 September 2026
Megha                                                14_WP_8065_2004


directing eviction of the Petitioner under the provisions of Public
Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971(the PP Act).


2)      Considering the nature of order that is proposed to be passed in
the present Petition, it is not necessary to narrate the entire chequered
history of the case. Suffice it to observe that Central Railway is the owner
of the land and structure located thereon admeasuring 375.48 sq.mtrs.
adjoining Sion Railway Station at Mumbai. Central Railway used to
operate its Booking Office in the premises. Since Booking Office was
shifted, the Railway decided to allow the premises forming part of old
Booking Office to Sion Central Railway Employees’ Cooperative Society.
Accordingly by letter dated 23 February 1985, Central Railway allocated
the premises to the Society for operation of a consumer store. The
Society in turn inducted the Petitioner for conducting consumer store on
payment of rent of Rs.6,000/- per month. This is how the Petitioner has
been occupying the premises since the year 1985. There have been
several rounds of orders passed by the Estate Officer under the
provisions of the PP Act as well as orders passed by the City Civil Court
and by this Court and it is not necessary to refer to details of those
orders. Suffice it to observe that after several rounds of remands, an
order dated 21 March 2001 was passed by the Estate Officer directing
eviction of the Petitioner from the premises. The Petitioner filed Misc.
Appeal No.209 of 2001 before the City Civil Court, which has been
rejected by order dated 10 September 2004, which is the subject matter
of challenge in the present Petition.




                                 Page No.2 of 6
                               30 September 2026
Megha                                               14_WP_8065_2004


3)      On 20 December 2005 the Petition has been admitted and interim
stay is granted to the eviction order subject to the condition of the
Petitioner depositing sum of Rs.30,00,000/- in three equal monthly
installments of Rs.10,00,000/- each and Petitioner depositing monthly
compensation of Rs.30,000/- from 10 January 2006 during pendency of
the Petition.


4)      It appears that since the Railway administration needs the land
on which the premises are situated for construction of 5 th and 6th Railway
line project comprising inter-alia of Sion ROB/road over flyover bridge, a
fresh show cause notice was issued by the Estate Officer under the
provisions of the PP Act on 23 June 2023. The Petitioner moved this
Court and order dated 9 June 2025 is passed taking note of draft consent
terms tendered by the Petitioner. Under the draft consent terms, the
Petitioner agreed to return the premises by permitting the Railway
Administration to withdraw the entire monthly deposit of Rs.30,000/-
made during pendency of the Petition alongwith interest accrued
thereon. However, the Petitioner wanted to withdraw the amount of
Rs.30,00,000/- deposited in this Court alongwith the interest accrued
thereon. It appears that the Railway Administration has not consented to
the arrangement suggested by the Petitioner. Accordingly, the Petition is
taken up for hearing.


5)      I have heard Mr. Vyas, the learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioners and Mr. Govilkar, the learned Senior Advocate appearing for
the Respondents.



                                 Page No.3 of 6
                               30 September 2026
Megha                                               14_WP_8065_2004


6)      It must be observed at the very outset that the Petitioner came
into the premises not as a direct allottee of Railway Administration but a
mere conductor engaged by the Sion Railway Employees’ Cooperative
Society. Thus, there is no direct relationship between the Petitioner and
the Central Railway. In that sense, very authority of the Petitioner to
occupy the premises becomes questionable. It also appears that the
Petitioner has effected change of user in respect of the premises. Though
he was inducted to conduct a consumer store in the premises, what is
being operated by the Petitioner is now a furniture shop. Be that as it
may. Railway Administration is in urgent need of premises for the
purpose of 5th and 6th Railway line as well as for construction of ROB. The
photograph indicates that the work of ROB is left incomplete on account
of occupation of the premises by the Petitioner. The Petitioner cannot
continue to occupy the premises for eternity. Present Petition is pending
for 22 long years and pendency of the Petition has enabled the Petitioner
to occupy the premises. The Petitioner has deposited monthly
compensation of Rs.30,000/- per month for occupation of the premises
during pendency of the Petition. Towards past arrears of rent the
Petitioner has also deposited an amount of Rs.30,00,000/- in pursuance
of order dated 20 December 2005. The Petitioner has now shown
willingess to handover possession of premises to Railways. However, Mr.
Vyas has suggested that Petitioner be permitted to withdraw the amount
of Rs.30,00,000/- deposited by him in pursuance of order dated 20
December 2005 alongwith interest accrued thereon. In my view, this
expectation on the part of the Petitioner is totally baseless. Amount of
Rs.30,00,000/- is deposited by the Petitioner towards arrears of rent. In



                                 Page No.4 of 6
                               30 September 2026
Megha                                                 14_WP_8065_2004


that view of the matter, Railway Administration is alone entitled to
withdraw the same amount with the accrued interest.


7)      Now that the Petitioner has shown willingess to vacate the
premises and handover possession thereof to the railway administration,
in my view a quietus needs to be given to the entire dispute. Railway
Administration can be permitted to withdraw the entire deposited
amount in this Court alongwith accrued interest, which shall satisfy all
demands of Railway Administration towards rent/ penal charges in
repsect of the occupation of the premises till the date of vacation of the
premises. The Petitioners can accordingly be directed to vacate the
possession of the premises within a period of six weeks.


8)      I accordingly proceed to pass the following order:-
            (i)    Judgment and order dated 10 September 2004 passed by
                   the City Civil Court in the Misc. Appeal No.209 of 2001
                   is modified by directing the Petitioners to handover
                   possession of the premises to Railway Administration
                   within a period of six weeks.
            (ii)   The Petitioners shall deposit amount of rent for the
                   month of October-2026 in this Court.
            (iii) Railway Administration shall be entitled to withdraw
                   the entire deposited amount alongwith accrued interest
                   towards its claim of rent in respect of the suit premises.




                                   Page No.5 of 6
                                 30 September 2026
                          Megha                                                    14_WP_8065_2004


                          9)          With the above directions, Writ Petition is partly allowed and
                          disposed of. Rule is made partly absolute. There shall be no order as to
                          costs.


                                                                               [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]




Signed by: Megha S. Parab
                                                             Page No.6 of 6
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge                        30 September 2026
Date: 01/10/2026 15:09:45