1 mss OSWPL+517 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 517 OF 2011 THE BOMBAY CATHOLIC SABHA Through its President Mr. Gordon D’Souza & Anr. .. PETITIONERS Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA through its Chief Secretary & Anr. RESPONDENTS Mr. J. Reis with Mr. N. Engineer for the petitioners Mr. D. A. Nalawade, GP Ms. K. R. Punjabi for BMC. CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI & RAJESH G. KETKAR, JJ. DATED: 28/3/2011 P.C. The Bombay Catholic Sabha has filed this petition through its President praying inter alia that appropriate direction be issued to the respondent-Corporation in respect of declaring a structure legal or illegal whether if the same is in existence prior to 100 years or 2 mss OSWPL+517 structures in existence prior to 17/4/1964 or in existence prior to 1/1/1995 and particularly the policy of the State on removal of religious structures. The petitioner has also prayed that the respondents be directed not to take action in respect of the notices issued by them concerning Holy Crosses situate on road, footpath and other public places within the municipal limits of Greater Mumbai. 2. Our attention is drawn by Mr. Reis, learned counsel for the petitioners to the order dated 29/9/2009 passed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 8519 of 2006, where the Supreme Court has as an interim measure directed that henceforth no unauthorized construction shall be carried out or permitted in the name of Temple, Church, Mosque or Gurduwara etc. on public streets, public parks or other public places etc. The Supreme Court has further directed that in respect of unauthorized construction of religious nature which has already taken place, the State Governments and the Union Territories shall review the same on case to case basis and take appropriate steps as expeditiously as possible. 3 mss OSWPL+517 3. It appears to us, therefore, that religious structures which are in existence prior to 29/9/09 have been protected by the Supreme Court. 4. An affidavit is filed by Suresh Ganpatrao Sonawane, Deputy Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department,. Paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 thereof are important and hence, we quote them; “8. I say that pursuant to the said policy laid down by the Government, the concerned authorities started taking action of demolition of religious structures. I say that the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, Mumbai, however, pointed out to the State Govt. that after the demolition drive was started, certain organizations as well as representatives of people pointed out that demolition of religious structures should be carried out only, if such religious structures have come into existence after Supreme Court’s directions and the structures already in existence prior to that date are required to be spared. 9. I say that considering the likely law and order problem, the Govt. decided to stay the demolition of religious structures as ordered vide Government 4 mss OSWPL+517 Resolution dtd. 4.10.2010. Accordingly, instructions have been issued to all the authorities vide Govt. Resolution dtd. 14.3.2011 that action of demolition should be stopped. In the said G R dtd. 14.3.2011, it has been, however, clarified that the religious structures should not be allowed, if it has come up on any public roads, public parks or public places after 29.9.2009, on which date the Supreme Court has passed the order and specifically directed not to allow such religious structures to come up. I say that in the Govt. Resolution dtd. 14.3.2011, it has been stated that State Government desires to lay down specific and proper policy in this regard. Hereto marked and annexed as Exhibit 2 is the copy of the G R dtd. 14.3.2011. 10. I say that issue of religious structures involves sentiments of large number of people and any action to demolish is likely to create serious law and order problem. I say that the State Govt. will reconsider the whole issue if necessary in consultation with religious organizations and the political parties and take steps to frame appropriate revised guidelines after considering the directions of the 5 mss OSWPL+517 Supreme Court and all other relevant factors”. 5. In view of the statement made on oath by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Mr. Reis, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the petition. We permit him to withdraw the petition. 6. Needless to say that, if the respondent-Corporation decides to take action in respect of any religious structure which according to the Corporation are constructed after 29/9/2009 on public streets, public parks or public places it shall take action in respect thereof in accordance with law. 7. Needless to say that parties will be at liberty to approach the court, if need so arises. 8. The petition is disposed of as withdrawn. (SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.) (RAJESH G. KETKAR, J.)