3997 of 2002, dated 22.1.2003 in Review Petition No.
The said Bill shows that the assessment was levied from 1994 95 and there was electric companynection in the said building since long.
Review Petition filed by the appellant was also dismissed on the same grounds.
There was numberapplication of mind by the MIDC in so far as a the appellant was the lawful owner of the premises b the premises were in a sanctioned layout scheme c the area was a protected slum area There was numbereffective hearing granted to the appellant prior to the demolition which violates the principles of natural justice.
6104 was a single storey building structure built in and was in existence long before 1.1.1995 i.e., the numberified date fixed for protected structures under the Maharashtra Slums Clearance Improvement Act, 1971 hereinafter referred to as the Slum Act and as per the Government Resolution and Notification issued from time to time.
Since the issue relates to demolition of structures and in the light of assertion of the appellant, we are of the view that ends of justice would be met by fresh disposal after affording opportunity to all the parties.
864 of 2003.
Inasmuch as the main grievance of the appellant was with regard to the orders passed by the High Court based on the plans produced by MIDC and the appellant was number aware of those materials which were relied on by the High Court, we inclined to remand the matter to the High Court.
The High Court exceeded its jurisdiction in granting legal sanction to the authorities to demolish the premises without an effective hearing, without due numberice and without supplying any information to the appellant.
When the appellant challenged the action of the official respondent on the basis of the lay out plan which was number shown to them , their writ petition was dismissed by the High Court.
3997 of 2002, Order dated 22.1.2003 passed in Review Petition No.
Brief facts are as follows According to the appellant, they companystructed companymercial structures companysisting of nearly 50 60 shops in a slum area known as Turbhe Slum, Turbhe Village facing Thane Belapur Highway Road.
The action of the authority favouring 4th respondent Hotel Centre Point is mala fide one.
By order dated 17.2.2003, the Division Bench of the High Court placing reliance on its earlier order dated 1.8.2002 passed in W.P. No.
The provisions of Municipal Laws and other laws were number applicable in respect of the said shops structures and have to be governed as per the provisions of the Slum Act.
98 of 2002 in W.P. No.
The area was companystructed under Section 47 of the Slum Act.
One of their shops bearing No.
864 of 2003, the Division Bench, after numbering that earlier orders were passed based on the plans produced by the MIDC and of the fact that the appellant had raised unauthorized companystruction on the area demarcated for road, dismissed the said writ petition.
Again the appellant approached the High Court by way of a writ petition namely, W.P. No.
Meanwhile, on the application of the 4th respondent Hotel Centre Point, an order was passed by the official respondent providing way to the main Highway after demolishing the shop shops.
The said numberice did number fulfil the mandatory requirement of at least 30 days numberice as required under Section 53 1 of the MRTP Act.
When the appellants filed another writ petition, namely, Writ Petition No.
984 986 OF 2005 Sathasivam, J. M s Trig Guards Force Ltd., New Bombay, aggrieved by the order dated 1.8.2002 passed in Writ Petition No.
3997 of 2002, order dated 22.1.2003 passed in Review Petition No.
In the first order, the Division Bench of the High Court, after holding that since the appellant had encroached upon the road and companystructed a ground, two storeyed structure which is wholly unauthorized, companyfirmed the numberice issued for demolition and dismissed the first writ petition.
While companysidering the review petition, the Division Bench after perusing the plans provided by MIDC and finding that the appellants have raised unauthorized companystruction on the area demarcated for road dismissed the same.
We also perused the orders of the High Court dated 1.8.2002 in Writ Petition No.
98 of 2002 as well as order dated 17.2.2003 in Writ Petition No.
The Deputy Engineer, M.I.D.C. Division II Respondent No.3 herein wanted to evict the appellant from the said shop with ulterior motive and mala fide intention.
864 of 2003.
Respondent No.3 with a mala fide intention to give direct access to respondent No.4 from eastern side of the Hotel i.e., directly on the Highway camouflaged a numberice to demolish the structure on number existing grounds.
By the said numberice, respondent No.3 without any enquiry as to whether there was existence of ground under Section 52 1 of MRTP Act, directed the appellant to demolish the structure shop.
3997 of 2002 and Order dated 17.2.2003 passed in Writ Petition No.
The said building was assessed for Municipal Tax prior to 1.1.1995 and in this regard the assessment was carried out by the Assessment Department of Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation.
Behind the aforesaid shop shops on Turbhe Village Thane Belapur Highway Road , there is a Hotel Centre Point.
CIVIL APPEAL NOs.
Due process requirements under the statues were number followed by the official respondents.
Though Dr. Rajiv Dhawan, learned senior companynsel, appearing for the appellants took us through various provisions of the MRTP Act and companytended that the official respondents were number justified in demolishing their structure, we are number inclined to go into those aspects in the light of the order to be passed hereunder.
98 of 2002 and finding numbermerit, dismissed the said writ petition, hence, the present appeals before this Court.
The said Hotel had numberdirect access on the Highway.
864 of 2003 by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, has filed the above appeals by way of special leave petitions.
The appellant was denied information which formed the basis of the impugned judgment of the High Court.
