MOHANSING UTTAMSING TANWANI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since all these petitions involve common questions of fact and law, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) Writ petition No.2297/1996 has been filed by the petitioner who claims to be a social worker and activist of Shiv Sena, praying for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to take action against the respondent Nos.3 to 7. Writ Petition No.2307/1996 and 2309/1996, have been filed by the petitioners claiming to be in a representative capacity on behalf of other shop owners, since all the shops are situated at Jail Road, Dhule. Rest of the petitions are filed in individual capacity by the occupiers of the shops situated in the same vicinity. These petitioners pray for a declaration that the demolition of their construction by the Municipal Council was not permissible in law and for a direction that the Municipal Council should not demolish the constructions carried out by them.

(3.) We have heard Shri. Raghuwanshi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in W.P. No.2297/1996 and Writ Petition No.2325/1996, Shri. Girase, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in all other petitions, and Shri. P. M. Shah, learned Senior counsel on behalf of the respondent Municipal Corporation.