1 Amk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7629 OF 2009 Sagunabai Abaji Suryawanshi & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. The Hon’ble Minister, Revenue, Maharashtra State & 4 Ors. .. Respondents Mr. P. S. Dani i/b Mr. Suresh Rajeshwar for the Petitioners. Mr. N. V. Walawalkar Sr. Counsel i/b Mr. Prakash Jani for Respondent No.4. Mr. R. M. Patne AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 & 5. CORAM : MRS. R. S. DALVI, J. DATE : 11th March, 2010. P.C. 1. The petitioners are some of the members of respondent No.1 who have been initially allotted the plot of land on which the society buildings stood since 20th October, 1959. The allotment of the plot was done specifically for preference to be given by way of housing to backward class persons who did not have houses of their own. The buildings were constructed on the plot of land allotted to the society. The buildings have remained for about half a century and were dilapidated. The Society desired to reconstruct the buildings but did not have funds. The society gave the work of reconstruction to a 2 builder/developer. 61 new members were inducted in another building of the society. The petitioners are some of the members of the society. Hence, the contract with the developer was initially inter alia of the petitioners as members of the society which contracted with the developer. 2. There was a breach of the condition relating to the preference for letting out the premises of the society. The very allotment would become frustrated by virtue of that inherent breach. 3. The Government, therefore, made a policy decision, once again in the interest of the society and for the protection and preference of the members of the society who were to belong to backward class that upon paying 20% of the market value. The breach could be condoned so that the society premises could be redeveloped and reconstructed. This very policy of the Government based upon the reports submitted by the Divisional Commissioner to the State Government was in the interest of the members of the society. The new developer who has sought to intervene in this petition has entered into individual contracts with the members of the society including some of the petitioners. It is his case that he has paid Rs.5 lacs each to the members and have agreed to construct new premises of 1000 sq. ft. each for the members. The developer also made payment of Rs.1.20 3 crores to the Government representing the 20% market value of the society premises on behalf of the members of the society. Consequently the impugned order which requires the resumption of the land and reallotment to the members itself is also in the interest of the members of the society and for their benefit. All the original 24 members would obtain the benefits as aforesaid. The impugned order, therefore, does not prejudice the petitioners. In fact, several of them have already obtained benefits therefrom. The impugned order is not discriminatory against the members of the society who belong to the backward class. Consequently the impugned order cannot be interfered with. The Writ Petition is dismissed. 4. Mr. Dani applies for stay of this order. Several petitioners have taken benefits by way of cash payment from the developer. In the interim order dated 17.09.2009 the counsel on behalf of the society had made a statement that the society shall not allow any work at the site. The society now desires the construction work to proceed. Upon the petitioners who have received cash benefit from the builder returning the same to the builder within one week from today, the society shall not allow any work at the site to be commenced for four weeks. (R. S. DALVI, J.)