Bombay High Court
Laxmichand Bhavanji Satra vs Statement Of Maharashtra Through ... on 18 April, 2023
Bench: G. S. Kulkarni, R. N. Laddha
2023:BHC-OS:3049-DB
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
Chitra Sonawane.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO.6012 OF 2023
Laxmichand Bhavanji Satra
Age-71 year, An Indian Inhabitant
Residing at Krishna Apartment, B Wing,
Flat No.1201, Opp.Milap Petrol Pump,
S.V.Road, Kandivali(West),400 067
Mo.9653449981 ... Petitioner.
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra,
Through Government Pleader,
Original Side, Bombay High Court,
2. Municipal Corporation of
Greater Mumbai
Having its head office at MCGM
Head Office, Fort, Mumbai -400001.
3. Mumbai Municipal Commissioner
Having its head office at MCGM Head
Office, Fort, Mumbai-400001.
4. Asst. Municipal Commissioner
P/North Ward office, Liberty
Garden, Malad(W), Mumbai-64 ... Respondents.
...
Page No. 1 of 10
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
::: Uploaded on - 18/04/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 19/04/2023 16:52:53 :::
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
Mr Amogh Singh a/w Mr D.R.Singh a/w Mr Shailesh Rai i/b
Shailesh Rai for the Petitioner.
Mr Amit Shastri, AGP for Respondent No.1.
Ms Dhruti Kapadia a/w Mr Kunal Waghmare i/b Sunil K.
Sonawane for MCGM.
....
Coram: G. S. Kulkarni &
R.N. Laddha, JJ.
Reserved on : 23 March 2023.
Pronounced on : 18 April 2023.
...
Judgment (Per R. N. Laddha, J.) :
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Respondents waive
service. At the instance and the request of the learned Counsel for
the parties, heard finally.
2. The petitioner, who claims to be the tenant and occupant of
shops no.216 and 217 located on a plot of land with CTS
no.625(Pt) 1 to 7 at S.V. Road, Malad(West), Mumbai, since
around 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the writ premises'), has
instituted this petition seeking the following reliefs:
a) That this honourable court be please to
pass appropriate writ order and directions
directing the respondents to allot the permanent
alternate commercial accommodation free of cost
on the S.V. Road stretch having S.V. Road facing
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
frontage in lieu of the writ premises i.e. Shop
no.216 and 217 admeasuring 10.14 square meters
and 8.19 square meters respectively having height
14 Feet and constructed of A.C. Sheets and
partially brick wall, situated at on piece and parcel
of land bearing CTS no.625 (pt.) 1 to 7 on S.V.
Road, Malad west,Mumbai 400064 ;
b) In the alternate of the aforesaid prayer
clause (a) this honourable court be please to direct
the respondents to pay monetary consideration
200% (two times) of the market value of ready
reckoner in lieu of the writ premises i.e. Shop no.
216 and 217 admeasuring 10.14 square meters and
8.19 square meters respectively having height 14
Feet and constructed of A.C. Sheets and partially
brick wall, situated at on piece and parcel of land
bearing CTS No. 625 (pt.) 1 to 7 on S.V.Road,
Malad west, Mumbai 400064 ;
c) This Honourable Court be please to pass
appropriate writ, order and/or direction thereby
directing the respondents to disclose the list of
commercial premises available in their inventory
on S.V. Road and Linking road (from Borivali west
to Malad west) ;
d) This Honourable Court be please to pass
appropriate writ, order and /or direction thereby
directing the respondents to not to take any
coercive action against the writ premises i.e. Shop
no.216 and 217 admeasuring 10.14 square meters
and 8.19 square meters respectively having height
14 Feet and constructed of A.C. Sheets and
partially brick wall, situated at on piece and parcel
of land bearing CTS No. 625 (pt.) 1 to 7 on S.V.
Road, Malad west, Mumbai 400064, during
pendency of the present writ petition ;
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
e) Interim and ad-interim reliefs in terms of
prayer clause (d) ;
f) Cost of the petition be provided for ;
g) Such further and other reliefs as this
Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case be granted.
(sic)
3. Petitioner has pleaded that the writ premises have been duly
assessed by the respondent/corporations' tax collection department
since 1961-1962 and have independent electricity connections and
other statutory licenses and permits. The P/North Ward office
issued a notice under Section 314 of the Mumbai Municipal Act on
25.6.1999, informing the petitioner that the Corporation planned
to widen the S. V. Road stretch, which has a sanctioned road line
width of 90 ft. It is a major arterial road. As a result, it was
necessary to remove any obstructions from the road line to make
the entire road width available to traffic. The petitioner was
instructed to remove and demolish the writ premises within seven
days of receiving the notice, or else the ward office would demolish
the writ shops. The petitioner was also informed that he would be
provided with alternate accommodation either beyond the road line
or in municipal premises elsewhere if he satisfied the condition that
the writ premises were in existence prior to 1.4.1962. Similar
notices were also given to other occupants/owners along the same
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
stretch of the S.V. Road.
4. Heard Mr Amogh Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner,
Mr Amit Shastri, learned Additional Government Pleader for
Respondent/State and Ms Dhruti Kapadia, learned Counsel for
Respondents No.2 to 4.
5. Mr Amogh Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner,
however, made it clear that the petitioner does not dispute the
competence of the respondent/Corporation and its authorities to
carry out such important public work. Furthermore, the petitioner
does not dispute that his structures fall within the road line or that
he would eventually have to vacate his structures. Mr Amogh Singh
submitted that since 1984, the petitioner has suggested relocating
the existing shops/structures to the culvert adjacent to S.V. Road,
Malad (West). Still, over time, that platform/space was allocated to
individuals relocating from different locations. According to Mr
Amogh Singh, the petitioner's main grievance is that the
respondent/corporation has neither offered him the land/space he
has been suggesting since 1984, nor is the compensation offered for
his structures adequate.
6. On the other hand, Miss Dhruti Kapadia, learned Counsel
for respondents no.2 to 4, submitted that as per prevailing policy,
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
the Assistant Commissioner of P/North Ward office finalised the
eligibility of the petitioner's structures and displayed it on the
website as on 23.9.2022. She submitted that although the
petitioner and other occupants were given the option to choose the
site in a letter dated 2.11.2022, the petitioner did not respond to
this letter. After that, a meeting was held with all sixteen project-
affected individuals, including the petitioner, to discuss the details
of monetary compensation for project-affected structures. All
structure owners/occupants have shown their willingness to accept
monetary compensation instead of acquiring the commercial PAP
available with the office in lieu of their project-affected structures.
However, by a letter dated 28.11.2022, the petitioner and other
occupants informed the respondent/corporation that if no suitable
alternate accommodation was available with the corporation, they
should receive 100% compensation at the ready reckoner rate and
100% solatium for a total of 200% monetary compensation. The
petitioner, however, sent a letter to the respondent/corporation
requesting that he be allocated suitable alternate accommodation in
the same area with the same market value or receive compensation
equal to twice the market value of the shop.
7. Ms Kapadia submitted that the respondent/corporation's
office had already initiated a proposal for monetary compensation
according to prevailing policy dated 28.3.2017 and had been
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
approved by the Municipal Commissioner on 13.1.2023.
Accordingly, on 25.1.2023, a letter was sent to all sixteen structure
occupants, including the petitioner requesting that they provide
their bank details and hand over their project-affected structures.
The compensation was calculated at Rs.29,80,146/- for shop
no.216 and Rs.24,07,041/- for shop no.217.
8. Ms Kapadia submitted that in the meantime, the respondent/
corporation asked IIT Mumbai to conduct a study on traffic in the
Malad area and submit a report/observations on how to reduce
congestion. Additionally, at a meeting held on 27.2.2023 in the
Municipal Commissioner's chamber, it was decided that once the
report/observations from IIT Mumbai were received, a proposal
would be initiated to increase monetary compensation on its
merits, if any. Accordingly, letters were sent to all occupants
stating that structures would be eligible for any additional
compensation in the future only after IIT Mumbai submitted its
report and approval was granted for an increase in the monetary
compensation rate. Reminder letters were also sent requesting that
account details be provided so the corporation could deposit the
compensation amount.
9. Based on the above contentions, the learned Counsel for
respondents 2 to 4 submitted that this petition may be dismissed
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
with costs.
10. The rival contentions now fall for our determination.
11. The petitioner complained that the respondent/corporation
had not offered him the land he had proposed since 1984, and
now, less/inadequate compensation is offered to its structures. In
this respect, the petitioner contends that he should get 100%
compensation at the ready reckoner rate and 100% solatium for
200% monetary compensation. We are, however, not inclined to
accept the petitioner's contentions in respect of the monetary
compensation equal to twice the market value of the ready reckoner
in the absence of any policy of the respondent/corporation or the
guidelines in that respect.
12. It is significant to note that the respondent/corporation has
already engaged IIT Mumbai to conduct a study on traffic in the
entire Malad area to address the issue of traffic decongestion and
that once the report/observations from IIT Mumbai are received, a
proposal will be initiated to increase monetary compensation on its
merits. Accordingly, in its communication dated 14.3.2023, the
respondent/corporation informed the petitioner and all other
occupants of the structures that if their structures were deemed
eligible for any additional compensation in the future, it would be
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
given after receiving the report/observations from IIT Mumbai and
approval for an increase in the monetary compensation rate in the
future.
13. In such circumstances, nothing prevents the petitioner from
submitting a claim if he wishes to do so. In that case, the
respondent/corporation would be free to consider the petitioner's
claim as permitted by law and respond to the petitioner. However,
the petitioner's claim cannot be made conditional on completing an
important public project for an arterial road in Mumbai at the
expense of the public exchequer. We, therefore, observe that it
would be open to the petitioner to submit his claim to the
respondent/corporation if he so desires and that it can be
considered by the respondent/corporation in accordance with the
law and policy. This exercise, however, should not come in the way
of completing such an important public project and thereby stalling
the work.
14. For all the above reasons, we dismiss this petition. There shall
be no order for costs.
15. At this stage, Mr Amogh Singh, learned counsel for the
petitioner, seeks ten day's time to vacate the premises. In the facts
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
WP(L)-6012-2023.doc
and circumstances of the case, we permit the petitioner to vacate
the premises within ten days from today.
16. Till such time, no coercive action be taken against the
structures of the petitioner.
[R. N. LADDHA, J.] [G. S. KULKARNI, J.]
______________________________________________
18 April 2023
