-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1403 of 2008 Rajaram Narayan Gawankar and another ....Petitioners versus Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority and another. ... Respondents Mr. A.C. Singh with Mr. Anil Yadav, instructed by Mr. D.R. Shah, for the petitioners. Smt. Kiran Bagalia for respondent No.1. Smt. Madhubala Kajale, AGP, for respondent No.2. CORAM: P.B. MAJMUDAR & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE: AUGUST 28, 2008. P.C. By filing this petition, the petitioners who are occupying residential structures have prayed for an order restraining the respondents from removing and/or demolishing any part or portion of the petitioners' premises. According to the petitioners, the demolition is sought for the purpose of road widening project of the respondent. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that the offending structure is approximately 7 feet away from the main highway road and further there is open space on both sides of the petitioners premises. -2- 3. In response to the notice of this Court, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 submitted that the petitioners would be provided alternate accommodation as per the policy framed by the respondents on petitioners satisfying that they are entitled to an alternate accommodation. Learned counsel for the first respondent has submitted that in order to see that the Highway is properly expanded, it is necessary to remove the existing structure. She further states that the structure will be removed as per the policy of the respondents. Considering this aspect, in our view, this Court cannot restrain the respondents from proceeding further with the removal of the offending structure as the same is required for the purpose of widening the Highway. Looking to the traffic problem and traffic congestion, in fact, it is the duty of the respondents to see that unauthorised encroachments on the roads or highways should be removed so that there may not be traffic congestion problem in the city. However, the respondents are also directed to act as per the policy framed uniformly so that the petitioners may not have any grievance of discrimination in this behalf. The Respondents are accordingly directed to follow the policy uniformly. The Respondents should not act in a pick and choose manner in this behalf. Learned counsel for the first respondent fairly states that the petitioners will be provided alternate accommodation as per the policy. She further states that after getting the area cleared by removing the encroachment, the same -3- area will not be transferred or sold for any commercial purpose. 4. In view of what is stated above, no further direction can be given in this petition and the statement of the learned counsel is recorded that the petitioners will be provided alternate accommodation as per the prevailing policy of the respondents. Petition is disposed of accordingly. Notice discharged. P. B. MAJMUDAR, J. A.A. SAYED, J.