2007 (12) TMI 521

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....follows: According to the appellant, they constructed commercial structures consisting of nearly 50-60 shops in a slum area known as Turbhe Slum, Turbhe Village facing Thane-Belapur Highway Road. One of their shops bearing No. 6104 was a single storey building/structure built in and was in existence long before 1.1.1995 i.e., the notified 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. 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. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 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. Again the appellant approached the High Court by way of a writ petition namely, W.P. No. 864 of 2003. 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. 3997 of 2002, order dated 22.1.2003 passed in Review Petition No. 98 of 2002 and finding no merit, dismissed the said writ petition, hence, the present appeals before this Court. 3) Heard Dr. Rajiv Dhawan, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Shyam Divan, learned senior counsel appearing for MIDC. 4) Dr. Raji....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Centre Point. He finally contended that the statutory scheme provides appeal and revision, without exhausting the same, writ petitions before the High Court are not maintainable. 6) We considered the relevant materials and rival contentions of the learned senior counsel appearing on either side. We also perused the orders of the High Court dated 1.8.2002 in Writ Petition No. 3997 of 2002, dated 22.1.2003 in Review Petition No. 98 of 2002 as well as order dated 17.2.2003 in Writ Petition No. 864 of 2003. In the first order, the Division Bench of the High Court, after holding that since the appellant had encroached upon the road and constructed a ground, two storeyed structure which is wholly unauthorized, confirmed the notice issued for d....