Wp 1693/11 1 SRS. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1693/2011 Villayati Ram Mittal Petitioner Vs. Slum Rehabilitation Authority & Ors. Respondents Mr.N.H.Seervai,Sr.Adv.i/b Mr.A.R.Shaikh for petitioner Mr.J.G.Reddy for Res.1 Mr. M.S.Surana i/b Mr.S.G.Surana for Res.2 Mr.D.A.Nalawade,GP for Res.3 & 5 Mr.Vaibhav Joglekar i/b Mr.C.N.Gole for Res.6 Ms.P.D.Ankleshwaria, Sr.Adv.i/b Mr.J.G.Reddy for Res.4 CORAM: P.B.MAJMUDAR & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATE: 12th December,2011 P.C. 1 Rule. 2 Mr.Reddy waives service for respondent no.1, Mr.Surana waives service for respondent no.2, Mr.Nalawade waives service for respondent nos.3 and 5, Mr.Joglekar waives service for respondent no. 6 and Ms.Ankleshwaria waives service for respondent no.4. Wp 1693/11 2 3 With the consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission. 4 By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of the High Power Committee dated 6/8/2011 which is at page 105 of the compilation. By the said order the High Power Committee came to the conclusion that there is no question of restoring the Application though it could have been decided on merits by this Committee as per the directions of State Government. The High Power Committee also decided the matter on merits and rejected the appeal of the petitioners on the ground that since the dispute is pending before this Court bearing OOCJ Suit No.1874/2007, the appeal cannot be entertained. The High Power Committee dismissed the appeal of the petitioner on merits also. The said order is challenged before this Court. 5 Learned Sr.Counsel Mr.Seerwai appearing for the petitioner vehemently submitted that in the earlier Writ Petition, WPL 711/2011,the Division Bench of this Court directed the High Power Wp 1693/11 3 Committee to take a fresh decision as to whether the appeal which was withdrawn by the petitioner can be restored or not. After such remand, the High Power Committee has now taken a fresh decision by which it has been held that though the appeal cannot be allowed to be restored, however, the same is also decided on merits in view of the directions given by the Chief Minister. It is the grievance of the petitioner that a detailed order was subsequently passed during the pendency of this petition by which detailed reasons have been given. 6 On behalf of the respondents an attempt was made to sustain the order. However, at the time of hearing of this petition it is agreed by both the sides that the matter may be sent back to the High Power Committee. The High Power Committee may now take a fresh decision as to whether the appeal is required to be restored or not. Such decision may be taken after hearing both sides and in accordance with law. In case the High Power Committee decides to restore the appeal, further date may be given for deciding the appeal on merits and such appeal may be thereafter decided within one month after restoring the same. In case the High Power Committee decides not to restore the appeal, then naturally the appeal is not required to be Wp 1693/11 4 proceeded on merits and in such eventuality, it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the said order in accordance with law. 7 On behalf of the petitioner it is submitted that the earlier appeal was withdrawn as the matter was pending before the Chief Minister and since the Chief Minister had directed the High Power Committee to look into the matter, the application for restoration is required to be entertained and the appeal is required to be restored. 8 Learned Counsel for respondent no.6, however, submits that once the appeal is withdrawn, it cannot be restored as it was simplicitor withdrawal without reserving any leave. 9 Now the High Power Committee-2 may decide the present proceedings by virtue of our order in accordance with law, since the High Power Committee-1 has given detailed reasons. 10 The matter be sent back to the High Power Committee-2 for taking appropriate decision. Wp 1693/11 5 The petition is disposed of subject to what is stated hereinabove. ( MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. ) ( P.B.MAJMUDAR, J. )