Bombay High Court
Moinuddin Nawabzada Through Alex N. ... vs Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited on 12 May, 2026
Digitally
signed by 13-WP(L)-16901-2026.doc
RUPALI
RUPALI RAJESH
RAJESH WAKODIKAR
WAKODIKAR Date:
2026.05.12
19:40:35 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
+0530
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (LODGING) NO. 16901 OF 2026
Moinuddin Nawabzada
Through Alex N. Fernandes ...Petitioner
Versus
The Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited
& Ors. ...Respondents
Ms. Hetal Patel a/w Mr. Suraj Shetye, Mr. Hemanshu Vyas, Ms.
Priyasha Pawar and Saba Shaikh, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Roopadaksha Basu a/w Ms. Heenal Wadhwa i/b The Law Point,
for the Respondent No.1.
Mr. Milind More, Addl. G. P. with Mr. Vikrant Parshurami, A.G.P., for
the Respondent No.2-State.
CORAM : ADVAIT M. SETHNA &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 12th MAY, 2026 (VACATION COURT) P.C. :
1. This petition is moved before the Vacation Court on the ground of urgency being that the Petitioner claims to be the owner of a Hoarding ("subject Hoarding" for short) situated on CTS No.2075 Wakodikar 1/4 ::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 12/05/2026 20:53:36 ::: 13-WP(L)-16901-2026.doc Pt. (FPNo. 165) in Vakola Division, Santacruz No.V, (subject Hoarding) since 1968 on plot belonging to one M/s. Solvex Oil Company Limited. The Petitioner had executed a lease of 99 years in respect of the said plot for a lumpsum amount under an agreement dated 20th December, 1972. The subject Hoarding continues to be on the said plot since the year 1968.
2. Issue notice. Learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 and Learned A.G.P for Respondent No.2 - State waives service.
3. The Petitioner has received the impugned communication dated 5th May, 2026 (Exhibit - J), pursuant to the Minutes of Meeting dated 29th April, 2026 of the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited (Exhibit - F), pursuant to which the Petitioner has been directed to forthwith remove the said Hoarding.
4. Heard learned Counsel for the parties at some length and with their assistance, we have perused the record.
5. It appears from the Minutes of Meeting dated 29 th April, 2026 and the impugned communication dated 5 th May, 2026 that the subject Hoarding is illegally erected on another plot i.e. FPNo. 164 Wakodikar 2/4 ::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 12/05/2026 20:53:36 ::: 13-WP(L)-16901-2026.doc TPS which is owned by the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited according to the said Respondent, instead of on plot FPNo. 165 TPS.
6. Mr. Roopadaksha Basu, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent - MMRC has placed some photographs and maps which are taken on record and marked as 'X'-for Identification. He would submit that the Petitioner has constructed a fence around the subject Hoarding which forms a part of encroached land/ plot in respect of which action has been initiated.
7. In our prima facie view, the Hoarding appears to be continuing on the said plot since the year 1968 until the impugned communication issued on 5th May, 2026, there has been no communication from the Respondent Authority to the Petitioner to remove the said Hoarding on any ground whatsoever. Prima facie, it appears that the reason given in the impugned communication relates to the subject Hoarding located on another plot which is according to the Respondent, illegal. Besides this, there are no other reasons on the ground of safety or otherwise which are mentioned in the said impugned communication, to justify removal of the subject Hoarding. Wakodikar 3/4 ::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 12/05/2026 20:53:36 :::
13-WP(L)-16901-2026.doc
8. For the above reasons, in our view, in the interest of justice, we direct that status-quo be maintained in respect of the subject Hoarding until the next date.
9. The Respondents shall file their affidavits-in-reply on or before the next date with advance copy to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
10. The Petitioner, on instructions, has fairly stated that they would remove any fencing which is around the subject Hoarding within a period of one week from today. Such statement is accepted. It is clarified that such statement, on instructions, is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Petitioner on merits of the Petition.
11. Place the petition for further consideration on 17 th June, 2026 before the Regular Court.
SANDESH D. PATIL, J. ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J. Wakodikar 4/4 ::: Uploaded on - 12/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 12/05/2026 20:53:36 :::