JUDGMENT :

ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.

1. The Petitioners are impugning an order dated 15th November 2021 (“the Impugned Order”) passed by Respondent No. 1 i.e. the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Tribunal. By the impugned order Respondent No. 1 has dismissed the Petitioners’ Application seeking condonation of delay in filing an Appeal under the provisions of Section 4(3) read with Section 45 (1A) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (“the Slums Act”). The Petitioners had in the said Appeal challenged the declaration of land bearing CTS No. 1056A (part), admeasuring approximately 250 sq. mtrs of Village Kanjur, Taluka Kurla, Mumbai Suburban District, situated at Village Kanjur, Kanjur East, Mumbai 400 042 (“the said land”) as a slum.

2. The brief facts as set out in the Petition are as follows:

(i) The said land belonged to the Petitioners’ father one Mr. Sebastian John D’Souza who is stated to have bequeathed the same to the Petitioners by his last Will and Testament. It is thus that the Petitioners claim to be the owners of the said land.

(ii) The said Sebastian D’Souza had constructed some chawls on land bearing CTS No. 1056/A Part/ 1009 Part which were assessed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (“the MCGM”). All the basic amenities had also been provided to the said chawls; i.e. water connection, electricity with separate meters, street lights, sufficient spaces around the structures, drainage system and water closets etc. The said chawls were not on the said land but only a small portion of an open passage admeasuring 29.28 square meters leading to the rooms in the chawls fell within the said land.

(iii) The Petitioners had in the year 2004 filed an eviction Suit (being RAE & R Suit No. 127/542 of 2004) against one Kamalram Dhobi who was an occupier of one of the structures in the said chawl. Kamalram Dhobi in his Written Statement dated 27th July 2006 had annexed a copy of the Notification dated 13th October 1995 (“the said Notification”) by which the said land had been declared as a slum under Section 4(1) of the Slums Act. It is the Petitioners’ case that it was only in the year 2006 when the said Written Statement was filed in the eviction Suit that the Petitioners became aware of the said Notification.

(iv) The Petitioners thereafter made an application dated 28th July 2006 to the Department of Archives, Government of Maharashtra for a certified copy of the said Notification. The certified copy of the said Notification was received by the Petitioners on 3rd August 2006. From the certified copy the said Notification, the Petitioners became aware for the first time that the said Notification had been published in the Official Gazette on 2nd November 1995.

(v) It was in these circumstances that the Petitioners on 29th August 2006 filed an Appeal under Section 4(3) of the Slums Act along with an Application for Condonation of Delay. Respondent No. 1 had thereafter by an order dated 29th June 2012 allowed the Application for Condonation of Delay and by a subsequent order dated 9th April 2013 also allowed the said Appeal. The declaration of the said land as a slum was therefore set aside.

(vi) Respondent Nos. 3 to 30 (“the contesting Respondents”) being the occupants of the said land filed a Writ Petition impugning the order dated 29th June 2012 as also the order dated 9th April 2013. The main ground of challenge in the Writ Petition was that the said orders were passed by Respondent No. 1 without giving the contesting Respondents an opportunity of being heard. The said Writ Petition came to be allowed by an order dated 4th December 2014 and Respondent No. 1 was directed to decide the Application for Condonation of Delay afresh after hearing the contesting Respondents. The Petitioners thereafter impleaded the contesting Respondents who filed their respective Affidavits to oppose the Application for Condonation of Delay as also the said Appeal.

(vii)