Advocates:
['HARNISH R GADHIA', 'FOR/PFOR/P FOR/P', 'GP/R', '', '', '', 'SM PURANIK/R', 'RAJEEV OMPRAKASH CHHABRA', 'FOR/R', 'RITESH R DAWDA', 'FOR R']

1 WP4844.13.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

WRIT PETITION NO.4844 OF 2013

[Sheikh Salim Sheikh Rashid and others .vs. State of Maharashtra and others]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

Court's or Judge's orders

appearances, Court's orders of directions

and Registrar's orders

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CORAM : A.P. BHANGALE AND

C.V. BHADANG, JJ.

DATED : SEPTEMBER 12, 2014.

Heard Shri H.R. Gadhia, learned counsel for the

petitioners, Shri M.M. Ekre, learned Assistant

Government Pleader for respondent nos.1, 2, 3 and 6,

Shri S.M. Puranik, learned counsel for respondent no.4,

Shri R.O. Chhabra, learned counsel for respondent no.5

and Shri R.R. Dawada, learned counsel for respondent

no.7.

This petition was listed for final hearing,

therefore, we have heard the submissions advanced at

the bar in details.

By this petition, the petitioners prayed for

direction to respondent nos.3 and 4 to grant

sanction/permission to the petitioners to construct

remaining 56 shop blocks on the 21000 square feet

(carpet area) land of respondent no.6-College i.e.

Government Ayurvedic College & Hospital, Nagpur by

the side of the compound wall of the college and

adjacent to Sakkardara Square to Chota Tajbagh road.

2 WP4844.13.odt

It is the grievance of the petitioners that despite

order passed by the Chief Minister of the State of

Maharashtra, as an Appellate Authority, under Section 47

of the Maharashtra Regional & Town Planning Act, 1966,

the grievance of the petitioners is not heard so as to

enable the petitioners to construct and occupy the shops.

It is further the grievance that 83 shopkeepers were

already allotted shops, however, 66 shopkeepers did not

get the permission to construct and occupy the shops and

56 out of 66 shopkeepers approached this court for

issuance of direction to respondent nos.3 and 4 to grant

sanction to the building proposal to be made by the

shopkeepers.

It is the case of the petitioners that pursuant to

Government Resolution bearing no. IUSe - 2003 /1602 /

Pra. Kra. 171/IU.1, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32, dated

20.10.2004, area of 25 x 1050 sq. ft. total area 21000 sq.

ft. has been allotted for displaced shopkeepers to enable

them to construct shop galas subject to certain terms and

conditions and approval by the State Government for

construction and occupation of the shops. The terms

were laid down in the said Government Resolution,

whereby it appears that shop galas are to be allotted on

the basis of license terminable by the Dean of the

respondent no.6 by one month notice in writing so as to

recover back the land from the shopkeepers in

accordance with due process of law. Important condition

is that any proposed construction is subject to submission

of building plan for sanction from the Town Planning

3 WP4844.13.odt

Department of the Nagpur Municipal Corporation.

It appears that pursuant to communication

between Government Ayurvedic College & Hospital,

Nagpur and Director of Ayurved College, Mumbai, there

was no objection from the Dean of the Ayurvedic College

to allot 6 x 260 meters land for the purpose of providing

accommodation to retailer shopkeepers. The petitioners

also relied upon list of 108 shopkeepers prepared by the

President of “Ayurvedic Chillar Dukandar K