SHRIKANT DINANATH GAIKWAD AND OTHERS Vs. CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (CIDCO) AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By order dated 19th June 2018, the parties were put to notice that an endeavor shall be made to decide these petitions finally at the admission stage. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.5488/2018 are the residents of a buildings known as Datta Krupa Apartment, Amrut Dham Society, and Avadhut Chhaya Apartment. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.8216/2018 is the resident of building Durga Mata Plaza. These buildings are situated in Navi Mumbai in Thane district. As far as the area in which the buildings are situated is concerned, it is not in dispute that the first respondent- the City and Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO) is the Planning Authority. CIDCO is a New Town Development Authority constituted under sub-section 3A OF DECTION 113A of the MRTP Act. The buildings subject matter of these petitions have been constructed admittedly without obtaining a developmental permission from the Planning Authority. There is no dispute that the lands below the buildings were acquired by the State Government by taking recourse to the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The public purpose of acquisition was for setting up satellite city of Navi Mumbai. After paying compensation to the owners, the lands were handed over to CIDCO by the State Government.

(2.) By Maharashtra Act No.32 of 2017, section 52A was incorporated in the MRTP Act. Section 52A reads thus:

(3.) Applications for regularization were made in respect of the buildings subject matter of these two petitions by invoking section 52A of the MRTP Act and Compounded Structures Rules. The challenge in these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the communications issued by the first respondent on 12th April 2018 by which applications in respect of the aforesaid buildings for regularization/ compounding under section 52A were rejected on the grounds set out in the said communication which read thus: