1 4075.11 SQP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4075 OF 2011 Shri Gourakh Rupla Patil & Anr. ...Petitioners Versus The Commissioner, Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.Mihir Desai for petitioners. Mr.A.S.Rao for Respondent Nos.1, 2 & 4. Mr.A.B.Ketkar, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.3, 5 & 6. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND R.Y.GANOO, JJ. DATED:- JUNE 27, 2011. P.C. 1. The fact that notice under Section 260 of the Mumbai Provincial Municipal Corporation was issued in respect of the structure referred to in this Petition, is not in dispute. However, the petitioners assert that they have filed representation before the Appropriate Authority requesting to regularise the structure. The said representation was filed as back as on 5th April, 2011 but no decision has been taken thereon by the Appropriate Authority so far. 2 4075.11 2. We agree with the submissions made by the petitioners that so long as the said representation is not finally decided one way or the other, the Corporation should not hasten the action of demolition of the structure. Inasmuch as if the Appropriate Authority were to accept the petitioners’ request for regularisation of the structure either as a whole or in part, to that extent, no demolition could be resorted to, if the petitioners were to fulfill all the terms and conditions specified by the Appropriate Authority. 3. In the circumstances, we dispose of this Petition with direction to the respondent No.1 to consider the representation made by the petitioners for regularisation of the disputed structure. If the said representation is not in proper form, the Commissioner or the authorised Officer shall inform the petitioners in that behalf and call upon the petitioners to comply with the necessary requirements for considering the request for regularisation of the disputed structure. That communication be sent to the petitioners within two weeks from today. Whereas, if it is found that the representation submitted by the petitioners is in order, the Commissioner or the authorised Officer may proceed to examine the same and take decision one way or the other in accordance with law after giving opportunity to all concerned as expeditiously as possible and in any case, 3 4075.11 not later than 8th August, 2011. All questions in respect of regularisation of the disputed structure are left open. 4. If the representation were to be rejected on the finding that regularisation of the structure is not possible, in that case, the Corporation will be free to take appropriate action with regard to the disputed structure on the basis of the notice already issued to the petitioners in that behalf and take it to its logical end, two weeks after the adverse decision is communicated to the petitioners. (R.Y.GANOO, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)