1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.67 OF 2008 Murugendra S. Khadabadi ...Petitioner. v. The M.C.G.M. And Ors. ...Respondents. Dr.Virendra Tulzapurkar, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Sandeep Parikh i/by A.R.Vaidya and Co. advs. For the Petitioner. Mr.K.K.Singhvi, Sr.Counsel with Mrs.Shobha Ajit Kumar, advs. For the Respondent Nos.1 to 5. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO & J.H. BHATIA, JJ. DATED : 17th February , 2010. P.C. 1 We have heard the learned counsel on both the sides. Issue pertains to giving garden adoption, which is presently has been adopted and has been maintained by the respondent nos.6 and 7. 2 Major contention advanced on behalf of the petitioner is, considering the correspondence on record whereby Corporation earlier insisted on construction of toilet, Corporation thereafter could not have entered into contract with the respondent nos.6 and 7 for the purpose of adopting garden without constructing toilet. This Court by an order dated 10th December, 2009 had called upon the Corporation to file an affidavit 2 in respect of existing structures and conversion of the same into toilet blocks. Subsequent to that an affidavit has been filed by Shri Narayan Pai wherein it is pointed out that Mali Chowky is situated in CRZ-II and on the sea ward side of the road and that will require permission from the Maharashtra Coastal Zone Management Authority and because of this difficulty, Corporation had entered into an agreement accepting alternative proposal put up by the respondent nos.6 and 7. Alternative proposal was to use toilet facilities of Hinduja Hospital in respect of which affidavit is filed but the said hospital has restricted user to the morning session to the senior citizen and to whom cards are issued by the respondent nos.6 and 7. 3 We have perused the policy. Policy does not mandate that there must be toilet facility, however, it can be permitted. In the light of that and considering that the respondent nos.6 and 7 are doing voluntary work, in our opinion, we need not presently interfere with the existing arrangement. 4 However, the Corporation considering that the property belongs to them to apply to the relevant authorities for permission for construction of toilet block. Counsel on behalf of the Corporation submits that they will apply for necessary permission for construction of 3 toilet from MCZMA. Considering the statement made by counsel for Corporation to apply and pursue the matter and if permission is granted to construct the same at their cost. 4 With the above observations, the Public Interest Litigation stands disposed off. (J.H. BHATIA,J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)