1 wp 8112.10 s IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8112/2010 Sarjerao Sadashiv Devkar & Ors. Petitioners versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. Respondents Mr.N.R.Bubna for petitioners Mr.V.D.Patil ,G.P.for Res.1,2 & 4 Mr.A.P.Kulkarni for Res.3 Mr.S.M.Gorwadkar i/b Mr.B.S.Phad for Res.5 Mr.V.A.Gangal for Res.6 CORAM: P.B.MAJMUDAR& MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE: 29th NOVEMBER,2010. P.C. . By way of this petition, the petitioners have challenged the decision taken by the Pune Municipal Corporation, giving construction permission to the respondent No.5 Society and have invoked the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court by way of this petition. It is prayed that respondent Nos.1 and 2 may be restrained from carrying out any construction in the disputed property. The petitioners have failed to point 2 wp 8112.10 out any title in their favour. 2 Respondent no.5-Society has been permitted to carry out development work for the benefit of the members belong to Vimukta Jati and Nomadic Tribes ( V.J.and N.T). It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners were having their huts in the disputed property and therefore they were also entitled to get the benefit to be enrolled as the members of the society and since they are having right, title and interest in said disputed property. 3 It is required to be noted that the learned counsel for the petitioners is not in a position to point out any legal right available in favour of the petitioners in any manner for getting any premises from respondent-society on the ground that the petitioners were lawfully occupying their huts in the past. It is not in dispute that for establishing their right they filed suit in Civil Court,Pune which has been dismissed as the 3 wp 8112.10 petitioners failed to make out any case . Though appeal is filed against the said decision , no interim order is passed in the appeal. It is required to be noted that subsequently petitioner No.2 has also filed Writ Petition before this Court bearing W.P. No.50/2010 challenging the allotment of land granted by the Collector to the society for the benefit of members of V.J.& N.T. The learned Single Judge of this Court on 13/4/2010 vacated the interim order granted earlier in favour of petitioner No.2 in C.A.No.858/2010 which was filed by respondent No.5 society in the said Writ Petition. The learned Single Judge also found that the land in question is not a reserved forest land. Against the order of vacating interim relief the petitioner carried the matter to the Supreme Court by filing S.LP no. 16618/2010 which was dismissed. Subsequently the petitioners filed this petition on 5/10/2010 challenging the action of the Municipal Corporation in granting construction permission. In the present petition also the petitioners have prayed for interim relief 4 wp 8112.10 restraining respondent No.5 to carry out construction and to allot the flats. They have also prayed for interim injunction restraining the contractor-respondent no.6 from carrying out further construction. In our view filing this petition is nothing but an abuse of process of law. The petitioners having failed to get any interim order in pending Writ Petition have tried to obtain the order by way of filing the present petition by taking out the additional point in this petition regarding the construction permission granted by the Pune Municipal Corporation. The petitioners have again tried to make an attempt to obtain an interim order by way of this petition. It is required to be noted that the learned counsel for the petitioners is not in a position to point out as to how the petitioners have got any right, title or interest over the suit property . It is pointed out that even in the past the petitioner who tried to encroach upon the land was given a notice for demolition by the Corporation in the year 2001 and the illegal construction carried out by the petitioners were 5 wp 8112.10 thereafter removed. The petitioners who are trespassers are now trying to create right in their favour. 4 This petition is resisted by the respondents and respondent No.5 has filed affidavit in reply , in which it is pointed out that petitioner no.1 was doing illegal activities against the society and his membership was also cancelled in the past. In the affidavit it is stated that petitioner no.1 has prepared bogus duplicate rubber stamp of the society and with malafide intention used the same as true and signed as Secretary and tried to play fraud and tried to mislead the municipal authority. It is pointed out that even the criminal cases are filed against petitioner no.1 . 5 Respondent no.6 has also filed reply and he has pointed out that petitioner no.2 is having three more tenements . The petitioners have no locus standi in the matter and the petitioners are neither the 6 wp 8112.10 members of the society nor have they established that they belong to V.J. and N.T.class. In the affidavit it is stated that the petitioners are blackmailing respondent no.5 and 6. It is argued that petitioner No.2 is a professional person whose profession is to put up unauthorized hutments in Pune District and thereafter, to put forward his claim to get a flat when the schemes are sanctioned and attempts to get such flats are made by showing his name, his wife’s name and names of other relatives. 6 The learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that the petitioners are good citizens and the contents of the affidavit-in-reply are not correct. It is further required to be noted that the petitioners have failed to get any order from the City Civil Court or in the writ petition which they have filed before the learned Single Judge of this Court. Unless the petitioners are able to show that they are having title in the suit property, they cannot challenge the 7 wp 8112.10 permission given to the Society for construction. Admittedly, the petitioners are not in a position to point out any right title or interest in the disputed property. The petitioners have failed to make out any case as to how they are aggrieved in any manner. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners may be allowed to convert this petition into Public Interest Litigation. When the petitioners are trying to misuse the process of law and when the petitioners are claiming personal interest in the property, such request at the instance of the petitioners cannot be entertained. The petitioner having failed to get any interim relief in the Writ Petition as well as in S.L.P. against the decision of the Single Judge, the petitioners have subsequently filed this petition on the ground that because of the subsequent development this fresh petition is filed. The subsequent development is that the Pune Municipal Corporation has granted construction permission to the concerned society regarding the construction of 280 tenements. This 8 wp 8112.10 petition has been filed with an oblique motive perhaps to blackmail respondent Nos.5 and 6 and to extract money. Filing of such petition is nothing but the abuse of law. We accordingly dismiss this petition. 7 The petitioners are directed to pay the cost of Rs.10,000/- to each of the respondent within a period of two weeks from today. P.B.MAJMUDAR,J. MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.