ASHOK ARJANBHAI JOLIA Vs. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is the fourth time that the petitioners have been compelled to approach this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Obviously, some callousness on the part of the officials of the respondents and the builder/developer has resulted in this repeated litigation between the parties which, in our view, could have been conveniently avoided, particularly, in view of the stand taken by the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (hereinafter to be referred to as 'SRA') even before the court.

(2.) Necessary facts are that the petitioners have started their business of flour mill in the old premises at Kulupwadi at Borivali with effect from 3rd January, 1977. In the year 2001, petitioners were held eligible for residential-cum-commercial structure by the Secretary, SRA as entitled to the property 'Annexure II'. A notice was served upon the petitioners by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai under section 314 of the Act for removal of the premises in question as unauthorised. The said notice was challenged by the petitioners by filing civil suit being suit No.907 of 2001 in the City Civil Court where ad-interim relief was granted which subsequently, by order dated 7th February, 2003, was vacated by the City Civil Court.

(3.) At the very outset, we may state that the learned Single Judge while dealing with the contempt petition No.33 of 2007 noticed as under:-