IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3076 OF 1999 Shri Paresh Surendra Mistry ... Petitioner Vs The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay .. Respondent Ms. Geeta Shastri for the petitioner. Ms. A.K. Savla for the BMC. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J., & V.M. KANADE , J. DATE : 2ND JUNE , 2008 P.C.: Challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to the order dated 20th February, 1998 passed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai holding that no new squatter stall licences of any nature whatsoever are granted on the Municipal street and the petitioner was directed to discontinue the trade of repairing of electrical goods within fortnight thereof, failing which action was required to be taken without any further intimation. According to the petitioner, he had filed a writ petition earlier before this court as the respondents were acting in violation to the provisions of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act. This writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 9th December, 1997 passed in civil writ petition No.5245 of 1997 wherein the order passed by the Corporation dated 9th October, 1996 and the order of the Appellate Court dated 28th January, 1997 were set aside and the Ward Officer was directed to consider the application of the petitioner for grant of trade licence and to decide the same in accordance with law. After passing of this order, according to the petitioner, he was neither heard nor given appropriate opportunity to put forward his case and in a mechanical manner, the impugned order dated 20th February, 1998 has been passed. 2. The challenge to the order is primarily on the ground that petitioner had submitted an Architect's certificate dated 4th December, 1996 which reads as under: “The said premises is located on the south side & parallel to Jawaharlal Nehru Road, near Vakola Masjid & opposite B.M.C. Market. The said premises is in alignment of other premises/structures in the vicinity and is off the road. No municipal services are passing through the said premises, observed no footpath/pavement on the southern side of J.N. Road, from the junction of western Express Highway to Vakola Masjid. 3. Alongwith the report, a map was also annexed being Exhibit ` DD' to the writ petition but without considering the same and relying upon the report of the Assistant Engineer of the Corporation dated 5th October, 1996, the order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. 4. There is no doubt that the order on the one hand relied upon the report of the Assistant Engineer (Maintenance) dated 5th October, 1996 while on the other, there is no reference to the report of the Architect submitted by the petitioner showing that the shop in question was not situated on the road or was not an offending structure. It is not in dispute before us that copy of letter of the Assistant Engineer (Maintenance) which has been relied upon by the Corporation while passing the impugned order was not furnished to the petitioner nor the petitioner was granted benefit. This apparently, is violation of principles of natural justice as no material which was against the petitioner could be taken into consideration by the authorities without putting the petitioner to notice of existence of such material. 5. In the circumstances, we quash the order dated 20th February, 1998 being in violation of principles of natural justice. However, we grant liberty to the Corporation to pass order afresh in accordance with law after furnishing copy of the report dated 5th October, 1996 to the petitioner and after hearing the petitioner in accordance with law and considering the documents produced by the petitioner during the hearing. Such order may be passed within six weeks from today. The petitioner shall be communicated the date of hearing and supplied with the material relied upon by the Corporation. This order, if adverse to the interest of the petitioner, shall not be given effect to for a further period of two weeks. Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE V.M. KANADE, J.