UDAYRAJ KEVAT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We make it clear that we refuse to get into the individual disputes between the Petitioners in the various Writ Petition. There is already a Society and it will represent all members. We will not hear individual members separately. Under no circumstances will we accept argument of preferential treatment being given to some members in comparison to others.

(2.) By the next date, the Society must give us an accurate updated statement of the amounts paid and what is yet to be paid towards transit rent by the Developer. The MHADA will simultaneously prepare a report as to the stage and level of construction of the project on site. We will pass further directions on the next date. Advocates for the Petitioners in the lead matter are requested to give notice to the Developers and their Advocates of the next date of hearing.

(3.) The MHADA is permitted to process any applications submitted by the Developer. Any further work which is done by the Developer will be subject to the orders in the Writ Petitions.