IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1976 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 1976 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO. 1976 OF 2007 Leroy G. Gigool. ] .. Petitioner Versus 1. Municipal Corporation of Greater ] Mumbai & 2 ors. ] .. Respondents None for the petitioner. Ms. S.M. Mujlekar for the respondent No.2. CORAM: S.B. MHASE & SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATED: 08TH FEBRUARY, 2008 P.C. : 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner was not present yesterday i.e. 7th February, 2008, and, therefore, the matter was adjourned for today. Today, when the matter was called out at 12.45 noon, learned counsel for the petitioner is again absent and the petitioner also is absent. 2. From the documents produced by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, we find that the land of the petitioner was included into the Town Planning Scheme No.III and these lands have been granted to the : 2 : Municipal Corporation in the said Scheme for playground and school. In view of this, the alternate lands have been granted in the Town Planning Scheme to the petitioner for Final Plot No.391 admeasuring 1262.50 sq. mtrs. and thus the petitioner has been compensated. After the Scheme has been finalised and the lands have already vested in the respondent-Corporation in view of the provisions of Section 88 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, the petitioner has no locus standi to challenge the use or change or user of the said land by the respondent-Corporation. 3. The Petition is, therefore, rejected. Sd/- Sd/- [SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] [SMT.V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J.] [S.B. MHASE, J.] [S.B. MHASE, J.] [S.B. MHASE, J.]