Acceptance of the landlord's undertaking and permission for the petitioners to occupy the premises till September 30, 2021 at their own risk.

JUDGMENT

1. The challenge as laid in the petition is to a notice issued by respondent no.1-Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation (for short "KDMC") dated March 25, 2021 and a communication dated June 21, 2021 issued under sections 264, 265, 265-A of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949. By the impugned notices, the petitioners were called upon to vacate the premises occupied by the petitioners which are described in paragraph 2 of the writ petition (for short 'the premises').

2. The impugned notice and the communication were issued for the reason that the premises were rendered dangerous for human habitation. Respondent No.3 is the landlord of the premises, also there are other structures on the land in question.

3. On the earlier occasion when we had heard this petition, it was contended by Mr.Deokar, learned counsel for the petitioners, that the Ward Ofcer had no authority to issue impugned notice. Mr.Rao, learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation had placed before us a decision of the Municipal Corporation which showed that the Ward Ofcer was delegated the powers to issue the impugned notice. Thus, the challenge to the notice on such ground could not be taken forward by the petitioners.

4. On this backdrop, we have heard learned counsel for the parties. It appears to us from the record that the premises which are in occupation of the petitioners are more than 50 years old and have become dangerous for the petitioners habitation and are likely to collapse as informed by the Municipal Corporation.

5. Mr.Deokar, learned counsel for the petitioners had submitted that the petitioners ought not to be called upon to vacate the premises and that the petitioners should be permitted to undertake structural repairs, for the reason that respondent no.3 has so far not shown any willingness that the petitioners would be provided with alternate premises of an equivalent area in the redeveloped premises which would be constructed by the respondent no.3-landlord. We had accordingly called upon the respondent no.3-landlord to place on record its stand on such contention as urged on behalf of the petitioners. Accordingly, an affidavit of respondent no.3 dated July 06, 2021 is placed on record in which the respondent no.3 has agreed to provide to the petitioners accommodation of equivalent existing area in the newly constructed building. Such averment is made in paragraph 8 which reads thus:-

"8] I say that Petitioners are openly threatening us that unless we settle at their terms, they would harass till last. The Petitioners intends to block and/or delay the construction to extort money from us, and nothing else. I say that suit premises and all other tenements are in dilapidated condition. I say that the Respondent No.3 agrees and undertakes to this Hon'ble Court to provide Accommodation of equivalent existing Area to the Petitioner in the newly constructed building in the said Property on tenancy basis as per law and in case the petitioners are interested in ownership, the deponent is ready to provide the same area at a subsided rate of Rs.2000/- per sq. ft. where as the market value as on today is at about Rs.8000/- per sq. ft."

We accept such statement as made on behalf of respondent no.3.

6. The other concern as raised by Mr.Deokar is in regard to the measurement of the area in occupation of the petitioners, He states that at a time the petitioners would vacate the premises, the Municipal Corporation ought to undertake measurement of the actual area in occupation of the petitioners. Mr.Rao, learned counsel for the KDMC has submitted that under the usual exercise as undertaken by the Municipal Corporation in regard to the structures which are called upon to be vacated, a measurement of the area in occupation is undertaken by the Municipal Corporation. We are of the opinion that it would be appropriate that a joint measurement of the area of the petitioners be undertaken by the KDMC in the presence of representative of the la