10. wp 6850-11.doc RMA IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6850 OF 2011 Indramani Ramabhilekh Pandey .. Petitioner Vs M/s. Sameer Construction & Ors .. Respondents Mr. R.B. Singh i/b M/s. R.B. Singh & Associates for the Petitioner CORAM : S.A. BOBDE & SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ DATE : 18th NOVEMBER, 2011. P.C.: 1. The petitioner has approached this Court against the order dated 25th March, 2010 of the High Power Committee, Government of Maharashtra in Appeal No. 148 of 2010. The question before the High Power Committee was whether the petitioner was entitled to be rehabilitated. The answer depended on whether the petitioner was occupying a separate slum structure on the cut off date i.e 1.1.1995. The High Power Committee found that the petitioner did not produce any documentary proof to substantiate his claim and therefore, dismissed the Appeal. 2. Shri. Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner has 1 10. wp 6850-11.doc submitted that earlier the Slum Rehabilitation Authority denied rehabilitation to the petitioner on the ground that another member of his family i.e Shri. Rajumani Pandey had already been rehabilitated. According to the petitioner, it makes no difference to the petitioner's case because the said Rajumani Pandey was not residing with the petitioner. If this contention is correct, then the petitioner was bound to show whether he is independently occupying structure in the slum on 1.1.1995, which the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate. There is no merit in the contention on behalf of the petitioner that because the electoral roll shows his name, he is eligible. We find that the electoral roll in which the petitioner's name appears is of the year 2003, hence, there is no merit in the petition, which is hereby rejected. [ SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, J ] [ S.A. BOBDE, J ] 2 10. wp 6850-11.doc 3