S.J. Vazifdar, J.

1. Respondent No.1 is the Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority (MHADA). Respondent No.2 is the Mumbai Building Repairs & Reconstruction Board (MBR&RB). Respondent No.3 is the State of Maharashtra through the Urban Development Department (UDD). Respondent No.4 - M/s. Earth Design & Developers is the developer. Respondent No.5 is the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. ("BMC" or "Corporation")

2. The Official Trustee originally sought an order setting aside a notice dated 28th April, 2009, issued by respondent Nos.1 and 2 under section 95-A of the Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Act, 1976 (MHADA Act) issued in the name of the Poojari of the Shree Venkatesh Balaji Temple. The petition was amended twice. By the first amendment the Official Trustee also sought an order setting aside all the building plans, permissions, NOCs granted by respondent No.1 to 3 and 5 for the re-development of the temple. The Official Trustee sought an order setting aside the orders / permissions granted by MHADA and MBR&RB, whether under DC Regulation No.33(7) or under any other DC regulation for the re-development or development of the temple. Lastly, the Official Trustee sought an order directing respondent No.5 not to grant any transferable development right certificate (TDR Certificate) to the developer, i.e., respondent No.4 unless and until the actual area measurement is done of the plots now bearing C.S. No.113 and 1/113 and the alleged illegalities and irregularities in the building plans and also the development scheme are removed.

3. On 4th October, 1927, this Court appointed the Official Trustee as the sole Trustee of the Shree Venkatesh Balaji Temple as well as the properties of the temple, including its funds and immovable property. The immovable property comprises, inter-alia, of a plot of land admeasuring 3240 square yards bearing C.S. No.113. The immovable property is located in Walkeshwar, a prime locality of Mumbai. According to the Official Trustee, a Dharamsala was also constructed on the land.

4. By an order dated 12th April, 1950, this Court had authorized the then Official Trustee to lease out an area of 1600 square yards of the said property. By a further order dated 26th September, 1951, 79.11 square yards was permitted to be given on lease. Pursuant to the above orders, agreements were entered into on 12th April, 1950 and 18th January, 1952, by which the Official Trustee leased an area of 1679.11 square yards from the original C.S. No.113. These leases were in favour of one C.U. Padia which were then assigned to M/s. Vijay Associates. This leased portion was then shown as C.S. No.1/113 in the revenue records - P.R. Card. Upon the sub-division, thereof, C.S. No.113 comprises of land admeasured 1561 square yards and C.S. No.1/113 which was given out on lease as aforesaid, admeasured 1679.11 square yards.

M/s. Vijay Associates utilized the entire FSI available on plot bearing C.S. No.1/113 by constructing thereon, a building named Ritu Apartments.

By an order dated 29th January, 1982, in Trust Petition No.18 of 1981, this Court sanctioned the use by M/s. Vijay Associates in the construction of Ritu Apartments of 4500 square feet FSI out of C.S. No.113.

5. On 19th February, 1991, the Ministry of Environment, Central Government, issued a Coastal Regulation Zone Notification (CRZ Notification, 1991). We will refer to this Notification while dealing with the Official Trustee's submissions. Suffice it to note at this stage that the property falls within CRZ-II.

6. The Official Trustee and the developers - respondent No.4 entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 29th November, 1994. The Memorandum recites that the Official Trustee invited tenders and offers for the sale of the said premises on 'as is where is' basis. The premises were described in the Fourth Schedule. The developers offer of Rs.1,36,00,000/- was the highest. Clauses 2, 3, 4, 13 and 14 read as under :

"2.The Vendor