The main legal point established in the judgment is that unauthorized constructions and the absence of automatic sub-division of the plot led to the rejection of the Petitioners' application for retention.

JUDGMENT

1. This Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of writ of mandamus for calling the papers and proceedings and setting aside the Rejection Letter dtd. 3/6/2022 and for issuance of writ of mandamus against refusal to grant permission to the application for retention dtd. 10/3/2022 or in the alternate prays for quashing and setting aside the order of rejection and for reconsideration of the application for retention afresh.

2. For the purpose of deciding the case, following facts are emerged : It is the case of the Petitioners that M/s. Artline Properties Pvt. Ltd. (for short "Artline") was the original owner of the land. The said Artline has been amalgamated and merged into the Petitioner Company on 18/10/2017. On the said plot bearing CTS no.997 and 997A of Village Juhu, FP No.25 of TPS Santactruz, Juhu Sector No.II at Juhu Tara Road, Santacruz (West), Mumai, a building was constructed by the said Artline. On 22/1/2013, the Municipal Corporation granted occupation certificate in respect of the said building constructed on the portion of the said land. The building was comprising of basement plus stilt plus 1st to 7th and 8th (Pt) upper floors.

3. It is the case of the Petitioners that the part of the land out of the said larger plot was granted on lease in favour of the said Artline and more particularly area admeasuring 1187.84 per sq. mtr. The Petitioner No.1 carried out the construction on the said plot which was granted on lease in favour of Petitioner No.1. It is the case of the Petitioner that the total area of the plot after deducting the setback was 2010.74 and total permissible built up area of the entire plot was 5026.85. As per the occupation certificate plan dtd. 23/1/2013 the built upon area of the said building is 745.24 sq. mtrs. and built upon area of the existing building is 2065.56 sq. mtrs.

4. The Municipal Corporation issued a notice on 25/2/2022 to the Petitioners under Sec. 351(1A) read with various other provisions of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act (for short MMC Act) alleging various unauthorized constructions/ alterations, change of user to the plan approved in respect of the said building and called upon the Petitioners to show cause as to why the said unauthorized constructions/ alterations and change shall not be removed or pulled down from the premises.

5. The Petitioners replied to the said show cause notice. The Municipal Corporation issued one more notice alleging change of use in respect of the same structures on 4/3/2022. On 11/3/2022 and 16/3/2022 the Municipal Corporation passed orders rejecting the contention of the Petitioners and held that the said construction described in two notices were unauthorized.

6. Being aggrieved by the said orders passed by the Municipal Corporation, the Petitioners filed Writ Petition in this Court bearing No. 8672 of 2022. During the pendency of the said Petition, the Petitioners filed an application under Sec. 44 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short MRTP Act) on 10/3/2022 seeking permission to retain the existing structure constructed by the Petitioners. On 22/3/2022 the Petitioners brought it to the notice of the Court that the Petitioners had already filed retention/ regularization application under the provisions of MRTP Act. This Court accordingly disposed of the said Writ Petition. This court directed the Municipal Corporation not to take any coercive/precipitative action against the Petitioners on the basis of the impugned orders passed on the two show cause notices issued by the Municipal Corporation, pending the application of the Petitioners for retention /regularization.

7. This Court made it clear that in case any adverse order is passed by the Municipal Corporation on the said application for retention filed under Sec. 44 of the MRTP Act no further action shall be taken against the Petitioners by the Municipal Corporation for a further period of