1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4869 of 2010 1] Smt. Anusayabai w/o. Anil Tatware (wrongly shown as Anusuyabai Anati Tatware) Age 32 years, Occ. Business R/o. House NO. 189, Mukundwadi, Hotel Rajhajs, Jalna Road, Aurangabad. 2] Gaurabai Babulal Jatve Age 45 years, Occ. Business, R/o. Mukundwadi, Jalna Road, Aurangabad. Petitioners Versus 1] The Collector, Aurangabad. 2] The Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad and Town Planning Authority, Aurangabad Taluka and District Aurangabad. 3] The Ward Officer (E) Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad. 4] The Administrator CIDCO, Aurangabad Udyog Bhavan, Town Centre, Aurangabad Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad. Respondents Mr.R.R. Mantri, Advocate with Mrs. Chaitali Choudhari-Kutti, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.A.S. Bajaj, Advocate for respondent No.4 Mr. Atul M. Karad, Advocate for the respondent NO.2 Mr. N.B Khandare, GP for the respondent No.1. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & A.A. SAYED, JJ.. DATE : 5TH OCTOBER, 2010. 2 ORAL JUDGMENT [PER B.R. GAVAI,J.] :- 1] Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, taken up for final hearing. 2] By way of present petition, the petitioners challenge the notice dated 24th May, 2010, vide which the petitioner No.2 has been directed to remove her construction on the service road within a period of 3 days, failing which it is stated that the respondent No.4 shall take steps for demolishing the said construction. 3] Though the parties have advanced their submissions on merits, in view of the larger public interest of clearing the construction on the service road, a consensus has been arrived at between the parties. 4] It is not in dispute that the shoplet/Plot No.15 has been allotted to the petitioner No.2 who is the mother of petitioner No.1. It is also not in dispute that the requisite amount has been deposited by the petitioner No. 2 with CIDCO. 5] The petitioner No.1 is presently running a FL-III Licence on the site which is sought to be demolished, which according to the petitioners, is owned by the petitioner No.2. The petitioners also submits that they have no objection in removing the construction, provided that some breathing time is given to them to construct the premises on the site allotted by CIDCO to the petitioner No.2, so that they are not deprived of their livelihood. It is submitted that in order to complete the necessary formalities, directions will also have to be issued to the respondent authorities. 3 6] In view of the agreement between the parties, we dispose of the petition with the following directions :- I] The respondent No.4 CIDCO, will hand over the possession of the shoplet/Plot No.15 to the petitioner No.2 on 11th October, 2010 and also execute an agreement to lease, which according to the learned counsel for CIDCO would give her a right to enter on the plot and make construction. The petitioner No.2 shall apply to the respondent No.4 CIDCO, on or before 11th October, 2010 for grant of necessary No objection Certificates (NOCs) for making construction. The said NOCs would be granted by the respondent No.4 on or before 15th October, 2010. The petitioner No.2 shall thereafter apply to the Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad i.e. respondent Nos. 2 and 3, for sanction of the building plan on or prior to 18th October, 2010. If the building plans are in accordance with the relevant byelaws, the same would be sanctioned by the respondent Municipal Corporation on or prior to 22nd October, 2010. II] The petitioners shall complete the construction by 21st January, 2011. On completion of the construction, the petitioners shall apply to the Corporation for grant of Completion Certificate by 24th January, 2011 and if the construction is in accordance with the building plan, the Corporation shall grant the Completion Certificate by 29th January, 2011. III] The petitioners shall thereafter make an application to the respondent No.1 Collector for grant of permission to shift the premises from the existing premises to the shoplet/plot No. 15 , latest by 31st January, 2010. The Collector shall decide the application made by the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law thereon on or before 11th February, 2010. In any 4 event, the petitioners will shift to the new premises by 14th February, 2011. IV] The petitioners would file an undertaking before this court that if directions given by this court, to the respondent Nos. 2,3 and 4 are complied with by them within the period prescribed they shall vacate the premises in question and deliver the vacant and peaceful possession to the respondent on or prior to 14th February, 2011. The undertaking as stated hereinabove, shall be filed within a period of one week from today. V] Authenticated/certified copies be supplied to the learned counsel for the parties, to act upon. VI] Needless to state that the present orders are being passed on the basis of an agreement arrived at between the parties only in order to secure the public interest and making available service lane and bye-lane for use of the public at large. We make it clear that we have not considered the matter on merits and parties would be at liberty to take recourse to such remedies, as are available to them in law, except what has been provided hereinabove. Rule made absolute in above terms with no orders as to costs. [A.A. SAYED,J] [B.R. GAVAI,J.] grt/wp