1 WP No.9154/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.9154 OF 2010 Crescent Entertainment and Tourism Ltd. Mumbai. Through its Director - Mr.Ishwarchand Pratapchand Modi, Age:77 Yrs., occu. Service, R/o 8, Ajanta Hsg.Society, Khedi, Tq. And Dist.Jalgaon. - PETITIONER VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Principal Secretary, Home Department (Special) Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2) District Magistrate, Jalgaon, Dist.Jalgaon. 3) Municipal Corporation for City of Jalgaon, Dist.Jalgaon, Through its Commissioner. 4) The State of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary, Urban Development Deptt., Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. - RESPONDENTS ***** Mr.PM Shah, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Sandeep Deshmukh, Adv. i/b Mr. Phatale Sagar S, Advocate for Petitioner; Mr.KJ Ghute-Patil,AGP for Resp.Nos. 1,2 & 4. Mr.PR Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.3. ----- 2 WP No.9154/2010 CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 14th NOVEMBER, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT: 1) Heard extensively and finally. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of parties. 2) This writ petition questions the propriety and legality of order dated 17th September, 2010 issued by Respondent No.1 – State of Maharashtra, Home Department, disapproving permission for erecting multiplex cinema over CTS Nos.2125 to 2131 and 2686 situated within the limits of Municipal Corporation, Jalgaon (Respondent No.3). 3) The Home Department, by the impugned communication addressed to the District Magistrate, informed that the Urban Development Department has informed, that the permission for the multiplex theater/cinema cannot be entertained unless the industrial user is changed to residential user. However, reading the affidavit and papers of Respondent No.3, in particular communication dated 24.7.2010, issued by the Planning Authority of Municipal Corporation, Jalgaon, in paragraph 2, in unequivocal terms, the Municipal Corporation, 3 WP No.9154/2010 Jalgaon, confirms and accepts that at CTS Nos. 2125 to 2131 and 2682, are existing Khandesh Mills in part; Khandesh Mill Complex and consequently, it is partly in industrial user and party in residential user. It is also informed, instructions were solicited by Respondent No.3 from Respondent No.1 by letter dated 2nd August, 2008. It was in furtherance of an application/complaint by Shri Ulhas Savle about change of user from industrial user to I.T.park. 4) During the course of submission, Mr.Shah, learned Senior Counsel, on instructions, submits, that the initial application, seeking conversion of I.T.park has lost its purpose. For the present, the I.T. Park incentives are not claimed by the petitioner. 5) Since the very industrial unit under the Khandesh Mills complex belonged to a private limited company, was consisting of and incorporated residential, industrial and commercial purposes, and for such user the insistence under the letter dated 17.9.2010 is uncalled for. 6) Considering above features of the matter and there being already in existence three activities, i.e. industrial, commercial and 4 WP No.9154/2010 residential, the insistence on the part of the State Government as warranting conversion, stated above, is not legally required. That apart, Municipal Corporation, Jalgaon (Respondent No.3) has modified the initial construction permission dated 16.4.2008, which was meant for I.T.park in an area of 34,888.24 sq.meters; the subsequent permission of multiplex cinema dated 6.1.2010 (page 23-H) informs of granting permission for commercial area to the extent of 7629.43 sq.metrs; residential - 1742.11 sq.meters and industrial - 28060.88 sq.meters, with conditions set out therein. 7) In the light of the permission from the Municipal Corporation, Jalgaon and there being already such user by the petitioners, the letter dated 17.9.2010 issued by the Home Department, seeking change in the user, is certainly uncalled for as there was already industrial and residential user of the property owned by the petitioner. The communication dated 17.9.2010 is, therefore, set aside. 8) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. CA for amendment disposed of. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/