BHALCHANDRA DATEY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed basically challenging the Notification dated 4-11-1993 issued by the Government under Chapter VIII-A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act.

(2.) The relevant facts are, the subject matter of this petition is a property bearing Plot No. 167/B Dadar-Matunga Estate with a building standing thereon. Petitioners Nos. 1 & 2 are the owners of the property. Petitioners Nos.3 to 10 are the tenants occupying the building which is standing on the land. The Petitioner No.11 is the Builder with whom the owners/Petitioners Nos. 1 & 2 have entered into an agreement for development of the property. Respondents Nos.1 to 5 are the authorities of the State Government. Respondents Nos. 6 & 7 are also the tenants occupying the building on the aforesaid plot. Mr.Jahagirdar, the learned Sr.Counsel appearing for the Petitioners states that the Petitioner No.5 has recently expired leaving behind two legal representatives namely Ms.Pratima Lele and Mrs.Nilima Gokhale. He further states that the Petitioners Nos.1, 2 & 11 will abide by the agreement between the original Petitioner No.5 on one hand and the Petitioners Nos. 1,2 and 11 on the other hand, in so far as legal representatives are concerned.

(3.) The present petition was filed basically for allowing the Petitioners to redevelop the property in view of the settlement arrived at between them, though the property was acquired under Chapter VIII-A of the MH& AD Act for the purpose of its redevelopment. In so far as the acquisition proceedings that were taken up for acquisition of the property and subsequent developments are concerned, they have all been narrated in the affidavit of one Mr.Ganesh Rathod, Under Secretary, Housing Department, Government of Maharashtra dated 7 th July, 2005. Paragraphs 2 to 8 of that affidavit read as under: