The central legal point established in the judgment is that the lack of notice from the Respondents did not prejudice the Petitioners' rights, as they were unable to submit a redevelopment scheme due to the pendency of an Originating Summons for interpretation of the Will and Testament governing the Trust lands.

JUDGMENT

R.D. Dhanuka, J. - By this Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners have prayed for a Writ of Certiorari for quashing and setting aside the Notification dated 18th September, 2017 issued by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 under the proviso to Section 14(1) read with paragraph A of sub-clause (i) of clause (c) of Section 3D of Chapter 1A of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 (for short 'the Slum Act'), and subsequent Report dated 28th August, 2013 submitted by Respondent No.7 along with the purportedly issued the subsequent Show Cause Notice No. SRA/DC/T/D-4/Raza Ekta/ Hearing/ 2013/6 dated 22nd April, 2013.

2. The Petitioners have also prayed for a writ of Certiorari for quashing and setting aside the Report dated 27 th December, 2010 submitted by Respondent No.3 in respect of the said Show Cause Notice dated 22nd April, 2010 issued under the proviso to the Slum Act and the Notification dated 28th August, 2015 issued by Respondent No.7.

3. The Petitioners also seek a declaration that the above referred documents are in contravention of law and in breach of principles of natural justice.

4. By way of amendment, the Petitioners seek an alternate relief that in the event of this Court upholding/refusing to decide/adjudicate upon the validity of the said 3C Notification, this Court shall issue necessary directions, order, writ to Respondent Nos. 6 and 7 to call upon the Petitioners to submit a Slum Rehabilitation Scheme in respect of the Trust Land in accordance with the law by recognizing the Petitioners' preferential right.

5. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding the Petition, are as under:

6. The Petitioners are the owners of the Land bearing CTS No.387, 387/1 to 34 admeasuring 1177.40 sq.mtrs. lying and situated at Village Kurla, Taluka Kurla, Mumbai Suburban District. (for short 'the said writ land'.)

7. On 22nd January, 1976 the said area was declared as a slum area by a Notification issued by the Authority. On 22nd April, 2010, a Show Cause Notice was issued by Respondent No.3 to Petitioners to show cause as to why proposal for acquisition should not be submitted to the Respondent No.1 for approval. The Petitioners were granted hearing by the Authority in pursuance to the said Show Cause Notice dated 22nd April, 2010.

8. On 9th June, 2011, the Petitioners filed Writ Petition bearing Writ Petition No. 583/2011 challenging the show cause notice dated 22nd April, 2010 and also the report. Initially, this Court directed the parties to maintain status quo. On 13th October, 2011,the said Writ Petition came to be withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh one as and when notification of acquisition would be published. It is the case of the Petitioners that on 20th October, 2013, the Respondent No.4 through is Chief Promoter filed application before Respondent No.3 for acquiring the writ property.

9. It is the case of the Petitioners that on 9th April, 2013, the hearing conducted by Respondent No.7 wherein the Petitioners were not present as no notice was served upon them. The said notice was served upon the erstwhile Advocates of the Petitioners, who according to the Petitioners had returned papers. It is the case of the Petitioners that on 22 nd April, 2013, Respondent No.8 purportedly issued another notice, calling upon the Petitioners and their erstwhile Advocates to remain present for hearing to be held on 7th May, 2013.

10. On 7th May, 2013, the hearing was held before Respondent No.7. In the Roznama it was recorded that a notice was issued at the Petitioners' Fort address as well as their erstwhile Advocates yet none remained present. On 28th August, 2013, Respondent No.7 forwarded a subsequent report recommending acquisition of the writ property. On 30th April,2014, Respondent No.1 issued a letter to the Respondent No.7 demanding explanation on Notices purportedly served on Petitioner Trust. On 5th November, 2014 and 18th November, 2014,