IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 1722 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 1722 OF 2008 PETITION NO. 1722 OF 2008 Roman Tarmat Limited ... Petitioner. Vs. MunicipalCorporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. ... Respondents. Mr. Avinash Fatangare for the petitioner. Ms. Archana Joshi for respondent No.1 & 2. Ms. Smita Gaidhani AGP for respondent No.3. CORAM CORAM CORAM : P.B. MAJUMDAR & : P.B. MAJUMDAR & : P.B. MAJUMDAR & A.A. A.A. A.A. SAYED, JJ. SAYED, JJ. SAYED, JJ. DATE DATE DATE : JULY 1, 2008. : JULY 1, 2008. : JULY 1, 2008. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. By this petition, the petitioner has prayed that the respondent No.2 may be directed to open the Nalla which is running from North to South direction on the Eastern side of the petitioner’s premises, which is shown in blue colour in the map at Exhibit-A, to the petition. 2. According to the petitioner because of the water logging at the premises of the petitioner, the petitioner is unable to take out his vehicle. He has also produced some photographs at page No. 34 and 35 of the petition. 3. In our view, such type of problem is recurring in nature and the problem of water logging is a chronic problem of Bombay city. It is the duty of the Corporation to see that problem of such a nature should be solved expeditiously so that citizens are not required to suffer hardship in monsoon. Corporation should plan out its future programme well in advance in this behalf. 4. On going through the photographs, we are convinced that an enormous water logging is there at the site. Considering the said fact the corporation is required to take appropriate action on the complaint of the petitioner, which is at page No. 31 of the petition, dated 14th May, 2008. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that after writing that letter to the respondents, because of the heavy monsoon, the water logging has taken place of which the photographs are produced at page No. 34 and 35 of the petition. Be that as it may, it is the duty of the Corporation to take appropriate decision in this connection. 6. During the course of hearing, the learned Counsel for the Corporation submitted that the petitioner ought to have made a complaint/ representation to Assistant Commissioner, P-North Ward Malad in connection with this problem, where the property of the petitioner is located. 7. We therefore direct the petitioner to make complaint/ representation to the Assistant Commissioner, P-North Ward Malad. On receipt of the representation, if any, the concerned authority may take appropriate action at the latest within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt such representation. 8. The learned Counsel for the corporation shall communicate this order to the concerned authority for taking appropriate action. 9. With these directions the writ petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. [P.B.MUJUMDAR, [P.B.MUJUMDAR, [P.B.MUJUMDAR, J.] J.] J.] [A.A.SAYED, [A.A.SAYED, [A.A.SAYED, J.] J.] J.]