ssp 1 WP 2169 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2169 OF 2010 Rakesh Arora .....Petitioner versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. ..... Respondents Mr.A.S.Singh, for the petitioner. Ms.P.A.Purandare, for respondent No.1. Mr.D.H.Mehta i/by D.M.Legal Associates, for respondent Nos.2 to 4. CORAM: P.B.MAJMUDAR & R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATE: 06 th SEPTEMBER, 2011 P.C. 1. By the above petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks directions against respondent No.1 for taking action against the alleged unauthorized construction carried out by the respondent No.2. 2. It is required to be noted that the construction has been completed in the year 1998 and the present petition has been filed in the year 2010. 3. On behalf of respondent No.2, a reply has been filed wherein it has been stated that the petitioner has an axe to grind as the petitioner was coveting Flat No.102 in the same building. The petitioner ssp 2 WP 2169 of 2010 has initiated proceedings before the Consumer forum and had lost in the said proceedings right upto the National Commission, before whom the revision filed by the petitioner has been rejected. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the Corporation makes a statement that pursuant to the application made by respondent No.2, which was accompanied by the amended revised plans, the alleged illegal construction has been regularized in terms of the Regulations applicable on the payment of premium, as also on the basis that the same can be regularized under the Development Control Regulation on the terms and conditions mentioned in the letter of the Corporation. In our view, in the conspectus of the facts as stated above, no case for invoking the writ jurisdiction is made out. The Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. ( R.M.SAVANT, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )