1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8742 OF 2010 Shri.Irfan Ahmed Shaikh Siddiki .. Petitioner V/s The Chief Executive Officer (SRA) & Ors. .. Respondents Ms.Radhika Samant Thankar i/by Mr.P.M.Havnur for the Petitioner. Mr.J.G.Reddy for Respondent No.1. Mr.Pramod G.Kathane i/by Mr.Yogesh Sankpal for Respondent No.2. Ms.P.S.Cardozo, AGP for Respondent No.3. CORAM: A.S.OKA, J. DATE: 18th November, 2010. P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. An order of eviction was passed against the petitioner by the Competent Authority under the provisions of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (I.C. & R.) Act, 1971, which has been confirmed in an appeal by the impugned order. 2. The finding of both the authorities is that the petitioner has been held eligible for allotment of permanent accommodation on the basis of a commercial premises held by him. The Petitioner claims to be eligible even in respect of a residential premises allegedly held by him. Admittedly in Annexure II, the petitioner is not held as eligible in respect of any residential premises. 3. It is for the petitioner to raise the issue of eligibility by filing an appropriate proceedings. If such appropriate proceedings are filed, same will be decided on its own merits without being influenced by the 2 impugned orders. If the petitioner succeeds in establishing the eligibility, he will be naturally entitled to all the benefits under the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme. 4. However, the order of eviction cannot be interfered with as it is pointed out that for implementation of the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme, almost all other structure holders have vacated their respective premises. 5. Subject to what is observed above, no case for interference is made out. Writ petition is rejected. (A.S.OKA, J.)