JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J. — Leave granted in each case.

2. Challenge in each of these appeals is to the legality of the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court at Bombay in a Public Interest Litigation filed by three citizens essentially questioning legality of Regulation 33 (7) of the Development Control Regulations, 1991 (in short the Regulations). These Regulations came into force with effect from 20th March, 1991. According to writ petitioners it is in essence delegated legislation under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (in short the Act). The writ petitioners questioned the amendment brought in 1999 which provided for a minimum Floor Space Index (in short FSI) of 2.5 plus Additional FSI required for rehabilitation of existing tenants plus incentive FSI on several grounds.

3. The present appellant resisted the claim.

4. The High Court instead of deciding the core issue has by the impugned judgment appointed some Committees to look into several aspects which according to it had relevance for the basic and recurring problems.

5. In support of the appeals, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court instead of decidi