1 cp-1-11.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.1 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.307 OF 2008 Joana Angelo Gowria and ors. ..Petitioners Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and ors. ..Respondents Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and ors. ..Contemnors -- Ms.Rajni Iyer, Senior Counsel a/w.Mr.S.U.Kadam i/b.Kadam & Co., for petitioners. Mr.S.U.Kamdar, Senior Counsel a/w.Ms.T.H.Puranik, for respondent nos.1 and 2 – BMC. Mr.G.W.Mattos, AGP for respondent no.3. -- CORAM : R.G.KETKAR, J. DATE : 22nd JULY, 2011 P.C: Heard Ms.Rajni Iyer, learned Senior Counsel a/w.Mr.S.U.Kadam, learned counsel for petitioners, Mr.S.U.Kamdar, 2 cp-1-11.sxw learned Senior Counsel a/w.Ms.T.H.Puranik, learned counsel for respondent nos.1 and 2 – BMC and Mr.G.W.Mattos, learned AGP for respondent no.3. 2] It is not in dispute that the petitioners had served upon the Corporation a notice under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short “the Act”) in respect of the City Survey No.811, Village Vile Parle, Taluka Andheri. The said land was under reservation for the public purpose of play ground in the sanctioned revised development plan. Since no action was taken for acquiring the said property, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No.307 of 2008. That petition was allowed on 12 th June, 2008 and Notification dated 22 nd December, 2003 was quashed and set aside and respondents were directed to deal with the application of the petitioners for development of the said property in accordance with law. Against this decision, S.L.P.(C) 8541 of 2010 was filed by respondent no.1-Corporation. The said S.L.P. was dismissed by the Apex Court on 12 th March, 2010. After dismissal of the S.L.P., the Corporation filed Review Petition (C) No.1103 of 2010. The said review petition was also dismissed. Thus, the reservation of the play ground in respect of property in question has lapsed and 3 cp-1-11.sxw consequently, the Corporation is now obliged to consider the application/proposal of the petitioners for development of the said property in accordance with law. 3] Mr.Kamdar states that pursuant to order dated 24 th June, 2011, the Assistant Engineer, D.P.Department, K-West Ward of respondent no.1 has issued communication dated 29 th June, 2011 addressed to the petitioners wherein he has informed that the acquisition proceedings was not initiated pursuant to the Notice under Section 127 of the Act and therefore, reservation of play ground has lapsed. The said letter is taken on record and marked “X” for identification. 4] The petitioners have submitted building proposal on 4 th July, 2011. Mr.Kamdar states that the building proposal submitted by the petitioners shall be considered in accordance with law and treating that the property in question i.e. City Survey No.811, Village Vile Parle, Taluka Andheri is not under reservation. The statement is accepted. 5] In view of this, I do not think it appropriate to take any action against the respondents. Hence, Contempt Petition is disposed of 4 cp-1-11.sxw with liberty to the petitioners to move this Court if occasion arises. [R.G.KETKAR, J.]