Sarat K. Behera v. Municipal Commissioner And Others, Bombay High Court, Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Factual and Procedural Background

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to direct respondent nos. 1 to 5 to produce all records related to two impugned notices dated 12 January, 2021 and 19 January, 2021. The notice dated 12 January, 2021 was addressed to Haji Bilal Patrawala and others concerning a plot at Mahalaxmi Flats for No Objection Certificate (NOC) for addition and alteration. The petitioner contended that Haji Bilal Patrawala and others were not the landlords of the structures occupied by the petitioner’s clients. The notice dated 19 January, 2021 referred to the earlier notice and concerned the petitioner’s premises at Haji Moosa Patrawala Industrial Estate. This notice was issued by the Municipal Corporation under section 488 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (MMC Act), which empowers the Corporation to inspect properties constructed on municipal land. The petitioner did not dispute that the premises mentioned in the second notice belonged to them but denied applying for any regularization or alteration as referred in the first notice.

Legal Issues Presented

Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the Municipal Corporation and other respondents to produce all records related to the impugned notices dated 12 January, 2021 and 19 January, 2021.

Whether the notices issued under section 488 of the MMC Act to the petitioner’s premises are valid and justified.

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner challenged the notice dated 12 January, 2021 on the ground that it was addressed to Haji Bilal Patrawala and others, who are not landlords of the structures occupied by the petitioner’s clients.

The petitioner denied having applied for any regularization, addition, or alteration as referred to in the notice dated 12 January, 2021.

Respondents’ Position

The Municipal Corporation issued the notice dated 19 January, 2021 under section 488 of the MMC Act, authorizing inspection of the petitioner’s premises constructed on municipal land.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court noted that the notice dated 19 January, 2021 issued under section 488 of the MMC Act referred to the petitioner’s premises and that the Municipal Corporation is empowered to inspect structures constructed on municipal land under this provision. The Court found no reason to interfere with the petition, deeming it devoid of merit. The petitioner’s undertaking to allow inspection after 4:00 p.m. on 27 January, 2021 was accepted. Consequently, the Court directed the Municipal Corporation to depute an officer for inspection at 4:30 p.m. on the same date.

Holding and Implications

The Court dismissed the petition as lacking merit. The petitioner was directed to permit inspection of the premises by the Municipal Corporation’s officer on 27 January, 2021 at 4:30 p.m. There was no order as to costs. The decision directly affects the parties by allowing the Municipal Corporation to proceed with inspection under the statutory authority of section 488 of the MMC Act. The opinion does not establish any new precedent or broader legal implications beyond the facts of the case.

Sarat K. Behera v. Municipal Commissioner And Others

1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for writ of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 1 to 5 to produce before this Court all the records pertaining to the impugned notices dated 12 January, 2021 and 19 January, 2021.

2. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited our attention to the notice dated 12 January, 2021 annexed at Exhibit “A” to the petition and the notice dated 19 January, 2021 annexed at page 19 of the petition and would submit that the notice dated 12 January, 2021 was to Haji Bilal Patrawala and others and was in respect of plot no. A (pt), plot no. 3, Mahalaxmi Flats, Estates, C.S. No. 4/69 (part) NOC for addition and alteration. He submits that the said Haji Bilal Patrawala and others are not the landlords of the structures occupied by his clients.

3. Insofar as the notice dated 19 January, 2021 refers to previous notice dated 12 January, 2021 addressed to Haji Bilal Patrawala and others. The petitioner had not applied for any regularization or addition or alteration as referred in the notice dated 12 January, 2021.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not dispute that the 2, 3 and 4 floor of Haji Moosa Patrawala Industrial Estate mentioned in the notice dated 19 January, 2021 by the Municipal Corporation issued under section 488 of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 (MMC Act) refers to the petitioner's premises. Under section 488 of the MMC Act, the Corporation is empowered to take inspection of the property of the structure constructed on the municipal land.

5. We do not find any reason to interfere in the petition. The petition is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed.

6. Mr. Rakesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner at this stage states that his client is ready to offer inspection after 4.00 p.m. on 27 January, 2021 in response to the notice issued by the Municipal Corporation under section 488 of the MMC Act. Statement is accepted as and by way of undertaking to this Court.

7. The Municipal Corporation is directed to depute their officer on 27 January, 2021 for taking inspection at 4.30 p.m.

8. There shall be no order as to costs.

9. All parties including the Municipal Corporation to act on the authenticated copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate of this Court.

Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 2067 of 2021

Sarat K. Behera v. Municipal Commissioner And Others

Factual and Procedural Background

Legal Issues Presented

Arguments of the Parties

Petitioner’s Arguments

Respondents’ Position

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

Holding and Implications

Sarat K. Behera v. Municipal Commissioner And Others

Comments