B. N. KIRPAL, R. K. ABICHANDANI, J.

( 1 ) ). In this group of matters the petitioners have challenged the action of the respondent-Municipal Corporation in removing cabins/rekdis/larri-gallas of the members of the petitioner-Association and other prtitioners claiming that they should be allowed to carry on their business at the original places. The validity of Section 231 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act. 1949 is also challenged on the ground that it is violative of Articles 14 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) ). The members of the petitioner Association and other petitioners have contended that they have a right to continue their trade at the same site where they have been doing their business. Most of these persons have been doing their business in rekdis/larri-gallas and a few of them in cabins by the roadside. According to the petitioners their carrying on trade at the disputed place did not cause any obstruction to the public. They have contended that they are licence holders and therefore have right to continue their business in the disputed places.

( 3 ) ). In Special Civil Application No. 1180/94 one more contention is raised that the Corporati

Click Here to Read the rest of this document