1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL, CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.1153 OF 2006 PETITION NO.1153 OF 2006 PETITION NO.1153 OF 2006 Shantaram B. Kumbhar ..Petitioner Vs. The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Anr ..Respondent Mr. V.R. Sutrale, for the Petitioner Mrs. A.K. Savla, for respondent No.1. Mr. M. More, AGP for Respondent No.2. CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: F.I. F.I. F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & ANOOP ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. V. MOHTA, JJ. V. MOHTA, JJ. DATE: DATE: DATE: 1ST DECEMBER, 2006 1ST DECEMBER, 2006 1ST DECEMBER, 2006 P.C. . Rule. Heard forthwith. The structure has already been demolished. The case of the petitioner, however,is that considering the policy of the State Government he is entitled to be rehabilitated. He had applied for his case being ascertained and was issued a receipt on 30th November, 1990. It is pointed out that another receipt was issued to him by the Corporation vide No.0280071. The petitioner is unable to produce the original. The xerox copy of the document shown to us does not indicate as to whom the land belongs. Under these circumstances if the petitioner has the original receipts he can apply to the Competent Authority with the supporting documentary evidence and the said Competent Authority within four weeks of the petitioner submitting the 2 documents to consider his case and decide the same according to law. The petitioner to submit his application along with the supporting documents to the Competent Authority within eight weeks from today. With the above observation petition stands disposed of. (F.I. F.I. F.I. REBELLO, J) REBELLO, J) REBELLO, J) (ANOOP ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA J). V. MOHTA J). V. MOHTA J).