2024:BHC-OS:3849 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 18891 OF 2021 Rolland Stanislaus Britto … Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents _____________

Mr. Rolland S. Britto, Petitioner present in person.

Mr. Milind More, Addl. Government Pleader for Respondent Nos.1 to 5.

Mr. Mukesh Subramaniam with Mr. Rony Wilson, for Respondent No.6.

__________________

CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE J.

Judgment Resd. On : 21 February 2024.

Judgment Pron. On : 6 March 2024.

JUDGMENT :-

1) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, Petition is taken up for hearing and disposal. 2) Petitioner has filed this Petition challenging Order dated 21 June 2021 passed by Minister-Revenue by which the Revision filed by Respondent No.6 has been allowed and Order dated 21 August 2020 passed by Additional Commissioner, Kokan Division has been set aside. The learned Minister has directed that area corrections be effected in respect of CTS No. 22D as well as CTS Nos. 25A, 25B, 25C, 25D by adding area of 130.3 sq. mtrs. as per Report of the City Survey Office, Borivali dated 19 November 2018. Petitioner has prayed for implementation of Report dated 8 October 2010 of the City Survey Officer by increasing the area of his Plot bearing CTS No. 25A by 176.2 sq. mtrs. By amending the Petition, Petitioner has also challenged Order dated 28 July 2022 passed by Collector, Mumbai in pursuance of the Order of the learned Minister as well as impugned survey / measurement notice dated 28 July 2022 and Survey dated 19 September 2022.

3) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that Petitioner’s grandfather purchased plot bearing CTS No. 25 corresponding to Survey No. 5 Hissa No.2 at village Mandpeshwar, Tal. Borivali, Mumbai Suburban District, Dahisar (West) Mumbai. In the year 1968, CTS No. 25 was divided into three plots as Plot Nos. 25A, 25B and 25C by Petitioner's grandfather for the purpose of distribution amongst his son and daughter-in-law. Plot Nos. 25A and 25C were transferred in favour of daughter-in-law (Petitioner's mother) whereas plot CTS No. 25B was transferred to his son Bernard Britto. In the year 1980, CTS No. 25 was officially subdivided by the City Survey Office into three plots bearing CTS Nos. 25A, 25B and 25C vide order of subdivision dated 1 November 1980. After his mother's death in 1988, Plot Nos. 25A and 25C were succeeded by Petitioner, his father, brother and sister. That Petitioner's father, brother and Sister executed a gift in favour of Petitioner and transferred their right, title and interest in Plot Nos. 25A and 25C in Petitioner's favour. It is Petitioner's case that in the year 1974, Plot bearing CTS No. 24 was purchased by his elder brother Kenneth Britto vide registered sale deed. That plot No. 24 was gifted in favour of Petitioner by his brother in the year 2007. This is how Petitioner claims ownership in respect of Plots bearing CTS Nos. 24, 25A and 25C.

4) It is Petitioner's case that plot bearing CTS Nos. 25B and 25C have been developed and buildings are constructed thereof. That plot bearing CTS Nos. 24 and 25A are still undeveloped and are vacant and in his possession.

5) Petitioner made an application to the Collector on 6 April 2010 requesting area correction in respect of Plot bearing CTS No. 24 and 25A by increasing the area by 230.85 sq. mtrs. by changing the boundaries. The Collector directed City Survey Office to take steps in pursuance of Petitioner's Application. The City Survey Office submitted a report for correcting the area of CTS Nos. 24 and 25A. Respondent No.6, who is the owner of adjoining plot No. 22D on western side of Plot No. 24 raised an objection to the report of the City Survey Officer. That the objection was adjudicated by Superintendent of Land Records, who directed City Survey Office to re-survey the lands of Petitioner and Respondent No.6 and accordingly a Plain table Survey Plan No. 1/2010 dated 3 September 2