1 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 700 OF 2000 Bank of Baroda & Anr. … Petitioners. Versus Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay & Ors. … Respondents. Mr. F. Devitri with J.P. Seth i/b Mulla & Mulla Craigie Blunt & Caroe for Petitioners. Mr. A.Y. Sakhare with Mrs. M.S. Modle for Respondent no.1 & 2. Mrs. Kiran Bagalia for Respondent no.3. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2264 OF 1999 National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development ... Petitioner Versus The Brihan Mumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors. ... Respondents. Mr. S.V. Kamdar with Mr. S.P. Bharati for Petitioner. Mr. A.Y. Sakhare with Mrs. M.S. Modle for Respondent no.1 & 2. Mr. Ravi Kadam AGP with Ms. S.M. Dandekar, AGP for Respondent No.4. Mrs. Kiran Bagalia for Respondent no.5. 2 CORAM: D.K. DESHMUKH & R. G. KETKAR, JJ. DATED: 8th October, 2009. P.C. 1 In view of the order that we propose to make, both the petitions can be conveniently disposed of by a common order. 2 Both the Petitioners have constructed buildings, after entering into an agreement with MMRDA. MMRDA granted licence to the petitioners to enter upon and occupy the land and to construct building thereon. Admittedly, now construction of the buildings is completed. MMRDA has executed lease deed in favour of the both the petitioners. In these petitions, the dispute is about payment of property tax and other taxes for the period during which the building was under construction and prior to the execution of the lease deed i.e. after the petitioners were permitted to enter upon the plot and till the building was completed. It is common ground that the issue is covered by section 45 the MMRDA Act, 1974. The learned counsel appearing for the Corporation states that there is no 3 agreement between MMRDA and the BMC as contemplated under section 45 of the MMRDA Act, 1974. Perusal of section 17 and 45 of the Act shows that in absence of the agreement referred to in sub section 1 of section 45, the State Government has jurisdiction to decide the issue. In our opinion, following order would meet the ends of justice. O R D E R i) The petitioners shall within a period of three weeks from today submit their representation to the State Government i.e. Principal Secretary, Urban Department, Mantralaya, in relation to the payment of property tax. Before submitting their representation to the Principal Secretary as directed above, the petitioner shall serve copy of their representation to the MMRDA and BMC. MMRDA and BMC shall submit their point of view on the subject matter of the representation. The parties are free to raise contentions, that they want to raise in support of their respective points of view. The Principal Secretary shall grant an opportunity of hearing to the parties and shall make appropriate order as per sub section (1) and (2) of section 45 of the Act and communicate it to the 4 parties. The parties shall be at liberty to adopt appropriate proceedings if they are aggrieved by the order. ii) All the contentions raised in the petitions are kept open. Rule discharged. Both the Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. (D.K. DESHMUKH, J) (R.G. KETKAR, J)