WP-LOD-39-11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION LOD. NO.39 OF 2011 Siddiqui Israr Ahmed Mohammed Alam .. Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors .. Respondents Mr.Y.E.Mooman i/by M.B.Gawde for the petitioner. Mr.G.W.Mattos, A.G.P for the State. Mr.K.R.Tiwari for respondent No.4. Mrs.T.H.Puranik for respondent No.5. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 2nd FEBRUARY 2011 P.C. After the matter was placed on the earlier occasion and the clarification was sought from the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority and the Regional Authority/Board, an affidavit has been filed by the competent person/competent officer enclosing therewith a plan demarcating the permanent alternate accommodation which is to be allotted to the petitioner. In para 7 of the affidavit it has been stated that under the agreement to be executed by the petitioner he was to be allotted Shop No.11 admeasuring 25.06 sq.mtrs. This fact was WP-LOD-39-11 2 informed by the MHADA/Regional Unit by a letter dated 3rd January 2011 addressed to the petitioner. He was called upon to execute the agreement with respondent No.4-developer. 2 The respondent No.4 has also forwarded certified copy of the plan demarcating the shop to be allotted to the petitioner through the Regional Unit. 3 The dispute was with regard to the area but now it has been clarified by the officer that the area would be 25.06 sq.mtrs. Instead of Shop No.11, Shop No.5 will be allotted to the petitioner with identical area and dimensions. This shop is demarcated on the plan which is annexed to this affidavit. 4 After the matter was argued for sometime and the petitioner perused this affidavit so also the plan, he has no objection for taking possession of Shop No.5 admeasuring 25.06 sq.mtrs which has been demarcated in yellow colour hatched lines on the plan annexed to the affidavit filed on behalf of the Regional Unit, namely, the Mumbai Repairs and Re-construction Board. WP-LOD-39-11 3 5 It is agreed between the petitioner and respondent No.4 that necessary agreement for permanent alternate accommodation in the form of this Shop No.5 admeasuring 25.06 sq.mtrs would be executed on or before 4th February 2011. It is also agreed between the parties that the petitioner will attend the office of respondent No.4 on 3rd February 2011 at 12.00 noon and the respondent No.4 will keep ready all documents which shall be executed by the parties. 6 It is further agreed by the petitioner that on execution of the agreement for permanent alternate accommodation as set out above, he will hand over physical possession of the existing premises by 8th February 2011 to the respondent No.4 to enable him to re-develop the property in question. Needless to state that if the possession is not handed over, the order passed under section 95-A of the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 shall become operative and enforceable and the authority then can take physical possession with necessary force including police assistance from nearby police station. The statements as recorded and particularly with regard to handing over of physical possession shall be treated as an undertaking to this Court. Needless to state that when the officer/authority has been empowered to enforce and execute its orders with necessary police assistance, then, any locks and seals on the premises WP-LOD-39-11 4 can be also broken open to take physical possession. 7 The respondent No.4’s advocate on instructions makes a statement that the respondent No.4 will make all efforts to get the documents executed by the petitioner for permanent alternate accommodation registered with the registration authority and he will take steps as are necessary in law and complete the process of registration within a period of six weeks from today. Petition is disposed off. No costs. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)