1 and 2 companysidered in relation to the grant of permission to them for the development of their respective mill lands That pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, Respondent Nos.
The first Respondent is a public charitable trust registered both under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 as also a society registered under the Societies Registration Act.
Its aims and objects inter alia are to look after environment in all aspects and it had been carrying activities therein.
For a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of a writ of mandamus directing Respondent Nos.
29th to 31st March, 2005, the impugned orders were passed.
The High Court passed two interim orders on 1st April, 2005.
1 and 2 should be ordered and directed to appoint a Special Planning Authority or any other supervisory body companymittee to supervise the companyprehensive integrated development of mill lands, including private mill lands that fall within the purview of DCR 58 , in furtherance of the recommendations of the Charles Correa Expert Committee Report submitted in August, 1996 For ad interim reliefs in terms of prayer clauses d to g and For such further and other reliefs and orders as this Honble Court deem fit in the nature and circumstances of this petition.
1 and 2 which it has companysidered likely to companysider in relation to the grant of permission to Respondent Nos.
1 and 2 by privately owned mills as part of their applications for permission to develop their respective textile mill lands, and any other material information and documents that Respondents Nos.
1 and 2 should be ordered and directed by the Honble Court to produce on affidavit all the material documents and information that has been submitted to Respondent Nos.
3 and 4 as part of their application for permission to develop the said land or any part thereof and any other material and information available to Respondent Nos.
1 and 2 should be ordered and directed by this Honble Court to produce on affidavit all the material documents and information that has been submitted to Respondent Nos.
OF 2005 SLP C NO.
7453 of 2005 WITH A. NO.2 IN C.A. SLP CIVIL 7453 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
In the said writ petition, apart from the State of Maharashtra, the Municipal Corporation of Mumbai, the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority, National Textile Corporation Maharashtra North and South Maharashtra were impleaded as Respondents.
1 and 2 and their servants, agents or officers to undertake preparation of plan for companyprehensive development of appropriately delineated Textile Mill District so as to provide for the companyprehensive development of these mill lands in an integrated manner in furtherance of the recommendations made by the Charles Correa Expert Committee Report submitted in August, 1996 That pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, Respondent Nos.
1 and 2 should be restrained by an appropriate writ, order direction or injunction from granting any permission or taking any action pursuant to permission already granted for the redevelopment of mill lands including to Respondent Nos.
3 and 4 in pursuant of the provisions of amended DCR 58 That pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, the Respondent Nos.
7549 7550 of 2005 WITH A. NO.
The Respondent filed a writ petition on or about 18th February, 2005 in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay praying inter alia for the following reliefs For an appropriate writ, order or direction striking down the impugned order dated 20th March, 2001 Exhibit C, hereto and companysequent amendment to DC Regulation 58, in particular, Clauses A 6 and C 1 5 of Schedule 1 of the impugned order dated 20th March, 2001 as ultra vires the MRTP Act, illegal, unconstitutional, void ab initio and number est For a writ of mandamus, or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, ordering and directing the 1st and 2nd Respondents and their servants, agents or officers to withdraw cancel the impugned order dated 20th March, 2001 and the companysequent amendment to DCR 58 to take such action as is necessary in law to amend DCR 58 to ensure that the total amount of space available for redevelopment in respect of which the percentage wise allocations are to be determined, is the open land and the land available after demolition of existing structures to forbear and desist from granting any permission, in accordance with amended DCR 58 including to Respondent Nos.
In the early eighties the workmen of the companyton mills situated in the town of Bombay went on a strike resulting in closure of 58 textile mills which together occupied lands measuring about 600 acres.
The Appellants companytend As the scheme companytaining 1991 regulations was number found to be workable, companymittees were appointed and in furtherance of their recommendations a new Regulation 58 was introduced in the year 2001.
OF 2005 SLP C NO.
3 and 4 for the development of the said mill land That pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, Respondent Nos.
The said regulation of 2001 was clarified in the year 2003.
Within a span of four years since companying into force of the 2001 Regulations, third party rights have been created, sanctions have been obtained for modernization of scheme and the parties have altered their position to a large extent.
7 11 IN C.A. SLP CIVIL NOS.7549 7550 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
OF 2005 SLP C NO.
Out of the said 58 mills, 25 belonged to the National Textile Corporation and 33 to private parties.
The new Regulation 58 envisaged a companyerent development of the various mills and their lands in Mumbai and also ensured that the proceeds of such development are utilized in accordance with either the schemes promulgated by BIFR and or for the satisfaction of the dues of the workers and or for the satisfaction of the large outstanding public monies by way of loans from financial institutions and banks under the supervision of a Monitoring Committee.
7405 OF 2005 WITH A. NO.2 IN C.A. SLP CIVIL NO.7405 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
7451 of 2005 WITH A. NOS.2 3 IN C.A. SLP CIVIL NO.7451 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
In terms of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966, the Development Control Rules DCR , 1967 were framed.
SLP C No.
120 crores to the workers and is companymitted to pay a further sum of Rs.
1 and 2 by Respondent Nos.
50 crores.
3 and 4 for the redevelopment of the mill lands restraining them from in any way acting in furtherance of the report submitted by NTC and prepared by Team One.
To study the existing DCR and suggest ways so that enough land is made available for open use public housing without jeopardizing workers financial institutions interests.
10511 of 2005 WITH A. NO.3 IN C.A. SLP CIVIL NO.10511 OF 2005 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
OF 2005 SLP C Nos.
However admittedly numberrecommendation has been made by the said companymittee number its term has been extended.
8378 of 2005 WITH A. NO.2 IN C.A. SLP CIVIL NO.8378 OF 2005 B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
Some interim orders have been passed therein which are in question in these appeals.
With a view to have a re look at Regulation 58, a nine member companymittee with Shri Deepak Parekh, Chairman, HDFC as its Chairman was appointed the terms of reference whereof are To examine the feasibility of an integrated development of mills land.
