RANJANADESAI, J.:-

The petitioner has challenged Notice dated 25/11/2009 issued by respondent 3 i.e. Assistant Commissioner, F/North Ward, Mumbai under Section 55 of the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short, "the MRTP Act") and order dated 18/11/2010 passed by him confirming the said notice. The petitioner has also challenged the inaction/decision of respondent 1 i.e. the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (for short, "the Corporation") in refusing to attorn the petitioner as its tenant though the petitioner fulfills the eligibility criteria and complies with the requisite conditions of attornment policy of the Corporation.

2. The case of the petitioner needs to be shortly stated:

The Corporation is the owner of plot bearing No.507 admeasuring 664 sq. yards., situated at Scheme No.57, Sewri-Wadala Road, Road No.37, Behind Sigma Laboratory, Wadala, Mumbai - 400 031. The Corporation has acquired the said land in the year 1930 from a Trust created by Tatas. The said plot was bounded by other plots bearing old C.S. No.336 in the East, C.S. No.506 in the North, Road No.37 in the West and C.S. No.508 in the South.

3. In or about 1960, C.S. No.507 admeasuring about 664 sq. yards, which is adjoining C.S. No.336 and C.S. No. 506 was allotted on vacant land tenancy (for short, "VLT") to one M.R. Apte by the Corporation. The allotment was made for the purpose of parking school buses. The said M.R. Apte constructed a structure on the said land and sub-let part of the said land to one S.V. Deshpande, who used to carry on the business of repairing motor vehicles. According to the petitioner, since S.V. Deshpande needed helpers, he engaged the petitioner to do the tin work in his garage. In or about 1975, the petitioner also erected structures and started residing and canying on business independently in the premises under the name and style of "Sharda Auto Works". According to the petitioner, he has been canying on his business in the structure admeasuring about 46.35 sq.mtrs. and residing there since his childhood in shed admeasuring 18.750 sq. mtrs. standing partly on plots bearing C.S. Nos.336(part) and 507 (part) from prior to 1980.

4. The Corporation initiated eviction proceedings under Section 105(B) of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 against the heirs of M.R. Apte on the grounds inter alia of subletting, change of user, etc. On 27/12/1986, the Inquiry Officer of the Corporation held that all the occupants are in unauthorized occupation of the premises in question and passed an order directing them to quit, vacate and hand over vacant possession of the said premises within One month. Heirs of the said M.R. Apte preferred appeal to the Principal Judge, City Civil Court at Mumbai against the said order. According to the petitioner, the heirs of M.R. Apte withdrew the appeal because they had applied to the Corporation for lease of the property. The Corporation did not take any action to execute the eviction order passed against the occupants. The petitioner along with other occupants continued to carry on their business without any objection or hindrance from the Corporation. The Corporation kept on accepting the rent from the VLT holder and was, in fact, considering granting lease to the heirs of M.R. Apte.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is residing and carrying on business to the knowledge of the respondents right from prior to 1980 without any hindrance, obstruction or objection from the respondents. Though the eviction orders have been passed, the respondents have not executed the said orders. The conduct of the respondents in not initiating action for the past more than 30 years amounts to acquiescence and, therefore, they are now estopped from taking any action on the ground that the structure is unauthorized. According to the petitioner, since past more than 35 to 40 years and in any event prior to 1/1/1995, the structure is in existence, he is protected under the re