1 cri-wp-581-11 pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 581 OF 2011 Jagdish Mhadev Jani .. Petitioner Vs. The Municipal Commissioner and ors. .. Respondents Mr. K. H. Holambe Patil for petitioner. Mr. Y.S. Shinde, APP for State. Mr. Sudeep Pasbola with Ms. Seema Rawade for respondent nos.1 to 5. Mr. Ashish Chavan for respondent nos.6 to 8. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & U.D.SALVI, JJ. June 22, 2011. P.C. Two different affidavits have been filed by Shri Rajendra Eknath Ghate, Asstt. Engineer of the respondent – Municipal Corporation. In the first affidavit it was stated that stop work notice under Section 354-A of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act was issued against the developer on 20/10/2010 and the site was inspected on 17/1/2011, when no 2 cri-wp-581-11 work was found in progress. However, in the additional affidavit filed by Shri Ghate, it has been stated that after the first affidavit was filed on 23/4/2011, the Corporation has regularized the work carried out on the site under the provisions of Section 53(3) read with Section 44 of the M.R.T.P. Act. Stability Certificate for the temple also has been submitted by the registered Structural Engineer and hence the allegations of illegal construction do not survive. Consequently, no criminal complaint is required to be registered against the developer. Mr. Holambe Patil, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the regularization is an illegal act and, therefore, he would challenge the same in an appropriate proceedings rather than pursuing this petition. Hence, the petition is disposed with liberty as is available in law. (U.D.SALVI, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)