RASHIDA RAZZAQ KHAN Vs. MCGM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Applicant by way of the above Interim Application taken out in Writ Petition (L) No.852 of 2020 has sought for the ' setting aside and review' of the ' ex parte order' passed in the Interim Application No.LD/VC/229 of 2020 taken out by Respondent Nos.1 to 3 (' Respondent Corporation') and for the restoration of the Application on compliance of the provisions i.e. properly serving upon the Petitioners and / or their Advocates and giving them an opportunity for their say and the same be heard on merits.

(2.) The Applicant in the Interim Application has alleged that the impugned order dated 30th July, 2020 passed by this Bench was ex parte and no notice of the matter had been given to the Petitioners and the Application of the Respondent Corporation was entertained in the absence of the Petitioners. It is further contended by the Applicant that the impugned order is a collusive order by hearing only the Respondents inter se and without calling for the records of the proceedings of the Writ Petition and without hearing the Petitioners that to in the prevailing Covid-19. Further it is contended that the impugned order is not only ex parte but unjust and against the principles of natural justice and requires to be set aside.

(3.) Mr. Damani, the learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant has submitted that the impugned order was passed in the absence of the Petitioners despite their having taken out Interim Application No.2352 of 2020 in the above Writ Petition, wherein they sought an order of injunction from this Court restraining the Respondent Corporation and Respondent No.4 therein from disconnecting the essential utility services of water and electricity supplied respectively in respect of the building known as ' Savera Terrace' situated at CTS No.2878 A of village Malwani, Abdul Hamid Marg, Malwani Gate No.5, Malad (West), Mumbai 400 095 (' subject building'), till such period and time this Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of this case. He has submitted that the impugned order was passed without any reference being made to the said Interim Application taken out by the Petitioners. He has submitted that the said Interim Application had been taken out by way of Review cum Interim Application as the Petitioners were aggrieved by the order dated 17th March, 2020 passed by this Court declining to grant ad-interim relief sought by the Petitioners as well as making certain remarks in the said order. He has submitted that the Petitioners were also aggrieved by the subsequent Notice issued by the Respondent Corporation on 19th March, 2020 for disconnection of electricity and water supply to the subject building. He has placed reliance upon an order of this in Al-Fateh CHSL and Ors. v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors., Writ Petition (L) No.900 of 2020 dated 19th March, 2020. and has submitted that by this order, this Court had directed all Municipal Corporations not to take coercive action against the occupants of premises, including demolition, eviction and holding auctions of attached properties. He has further placed reliance upon the orders passed by the four senior most Judges of this Court which includes one of us (K.K. Tated, J.) on its own Notice of Motion from time to time since 26th March, 2020 till 31st August, 2020 which had in order to protect the rights of the public, pending the pandemic issued directions to the Government authorities including the MCGM not to take any coercive action against the litigants. He has contended that despite these orders, the impugned order was passed permitting the Respondents Corporation to proceed and take appropriate action as per the notice under Section 354 of the MMC Act, 1888, being notice dated 5th February, 2020 read with the TAC Report according to law.