Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
A. S. Gadkari, Kamal Khata, JJ
Neelesh Ramkaran Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kamal Khata, J.
1) By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners seeks a Writ of Certiorari to quash and set aside the Notices dated 22nd October, 2024 and 11th November, 2024. Additionally, they seek a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.1 to forthwith release the seized cattle of Petitioners.
2) The Petitioners are in the business of running stables since the past several decades from the property admeasuring 2860 sq. ft. and 1333 sq. ft. bearing CTS Nos. 1165 of village Versova, Taluka Andheri, Mumbai Suburban district. The Petitioner’s have approached the Court being aggrieved by the action of Respondent No.1-Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), who seized the cattle from the Petitioner’s stable on 28th November 2024 amidst heavy deployment of Police Force with BMC officers of the K/West Ward.
3) Adv. Dhananjay Singh for Petitioners submitted that, the Petitioners and their families have been in occupation of the land and structures prior to 1961. They have been paying Municipal taxes as well as electricity charges payable to the concerned Departments. They also claim to have a Ration Card in their names which prove their
The court affirmed the legality of municipal actions against illegal squatters, emphasizing compliance with urban cattle regulations and the dismissal of petitions lacking clean hands.
The court upheld the legality of notices for cattle seizure, finding the petitioners to be illegal squatters who suppressed material facts, thus dismissing their claims.
The court affirmed that unauthorized occupants of land are ineligible for benefits under slum rehabilitation schemes, emphasizing the importance of legal compliance and cooperation with authorities.
Petitioners' claim to cattle stables was rejected as unauthorized; their non-cooperation with the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme rendered them ineligible for benefits.
The court affirmed that the Petitioners, claiming tribal allotment rights, failed to prove ownership of the land, thus upholding the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme's implementation and eviction orders.
The court ruled that disputed questions of fact regarding land area and project delays are not suitable for Writ jurisdiction, emphasizing the need for timely completion of slum rehabilitation projec....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that once land is acquired by the State Government under the Maharashtra Slum Areas Act, it vests absolutely in the State Government free from all ....
The Slum Areas Act governs tenement transfer, retaining jurisdiction over properties even after 10 years, requiring authority permission for transfer, thereby affirming lawful eviction for unauthoriz....
The court upheld the termination of the Petitioners' appointment as developers, affirming that proper procedures were followed and that the Petitioners lacked standing due to project delays.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
