Bombay High Court
Aries Technical Sales And Services Pvt ... vs The Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... on 14 May, 2026
Digitally
signed by
CHITRA
CHITRA SANJAY
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2026.05.14
17:29:30
35-WP(L)-17491-2026.doc
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO.17491 of 2026
Aries Technical Sales & Services Pvt
Ltd & Anr. ...Petitioners
Versus
The Municipal Corporation of Gr.
Mumbai & Anr. ...Respondents
__________
Mr Cyrus Ardeshir, Sr Advocate a/w Mr Bhavik Lalan, Shlesha Sheth and
Jagdish Rajgot i/by FZB & Associates for the Petitioners.
Ms Smita Vijay Tondwalkar for the Respondents No.1 & 2/BMC..
__________
CORAM : ADVAIT M. SETHNA &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 14 MAY 2026
(VACATION COURT)
P.C.:
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. According to the Petitioners, the urgency with which this petition is moved before the Vacation Court is that the premises of the Petitioners are likely to be demolished by the Bombay Municipal Corporation ("BMC" for short).
3. The Respondent/Municipal Corporation has initiated the process of demolition of the Petitioners' premises as well as some other premises Chitra Sonawane. Page 1 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 14/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2026 20:59:23 ::: 35-WP(L)-17491-2026.doc adjacent to the Petitioners premises on 12.5.2026. The Petitioners would state that they have been informed by the Respondent/Corporation that the demolition process would commence on 15.05.2026. It is in such backdrop, that we have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
4. We have noticed that the Respondent/Corporation has issued a Notice under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966, ("MRTP Act" for short) dated 20.04.2026 to the Petitioners. It is the case of the Petitioners that the said Notice has not at all been received by them. Be that, as it may; at this stage. Pursuant to this, the Respondent/Corporation has issued a Speaking Order dated 08.05.2026 at (Exh.A) to the Petition which has been signed by the Designated Officer on 11.05.2026. The order records that the Petitioners have been directed to remove the notice structure immediately from the receipt of the said letter, failing which the same will be demolished at the risk, cost and consequences of the Petitioners. It is on 12.05.2026 that the Respondents have initiated the demolition process.
5. The learned Counsel for the Respondent has placed on record certain documents including Notice dated 20.04.2026 issued u/s 55 of the MRTP Act and the Order dated 08.05.2026, received by her on instructions of the Officer of the Corporation on WhatsApp, as stated before us. The same has been taken on record and marked as 'X' for identification. The learned Counsel for the Respondent/ Corporation, on instructions, has stated that the photographs annexed to the Chitra Sonawane. Page 2 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 14/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2026 20:59:23 ::: 35-WP(L)-17491-2026.doc documents submitted to the Court would reveal that the enjoined structures to those of the Petitioners have been demolished on 12.05.2026.
6. On hearing Mr Cyrus Ardeshir, the learned Senior for Petitioners and the learned Counsel for the Respondent/Corporation, prima facie, at this stage, it appears that the Notice u/s 55 of the MRTP Act dated 20.04.2026 was not received by the Petitioners. The Speaking Order was passed on 08.05.2026 which records that the same has been signed on 11.05.2026. Immediately a day after i.e. 12.05.2026, the demolition action was initiated for structures including that of the Petitioners. It appears that the Petitioners have not got a reasonable opportunity to legally deal with such action.
7. Considering the above, the Respondent/Corporation shall file their Affidavit-in-Reply to the Petition on or before the next day with an advance copy served to the learned Counsel for the Petitioners. Such Reply Affidavit shall be filed on or before 08.06.2026. Rejoinder, if any, to be filed on or before 18.06.2026 by the Petitioner.
8. In the interregnum, by way of an ad-interim order, we direct that parties shall maintain status quo as on date, until the next date i.e. 19.06.2026.
9. Liberty to mention before regular Court.
[SANDESH D. PATIL, J] [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] Chitra Sonawane. Page 3 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 14/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 14/05/2026 20:59:23 :::