IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2443 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO.2443 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO.2443 OF 2006 M/s.Sumer Builders Pvt. Ltd. ..Petitioners. V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr.D.J.Khambata with Pradeep Sancheti i/b. M/s.Y. Bhansali & Co. for petitioners. Mr.J.Reis i/b.M/s.Niranjan & Co. for respondent No.6. Mr.N.V.Walawalkar with Mrs.P.A.Purandare for B.M.C. Mr.D.A.Nalawade, G.P. for respondent No.1. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND J.P.DEVADHAR, J. J.P.DEVADHAR, J. J.P.DEVADHAR, J. DATED : 14TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATED : 14TH FEBRUARY, 2008. DATED : 14TH FEBRUARY, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. In this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed that the respondent Nos.1 to 5 be directed to take steps to construct the proposed Development Plan road shown in green line on the plan at Exhibit B and to remove the contravening structure admeasuring 753 sq.ft. shown in yellow on the plan at Exhibit E annexed to the Writ petition. Further, the petitioners have prayed to implement the Town Planning Scheme IV and prevent the non conforming use of the structure in contravention of Regulation 24 of the Regulations - = : 2 : = - Controlling the development of the area of final scheme and interim relief in that regard are also prayed. 2. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the parties have referred to various documents, maps, as well as pleadings taken up in the Writ Petition even with reference to other litigations pending between the parties which are in respect of Plot No.878 & 879. It is not necessary for us to go into these controversies. Suffice it to say that the parties are ad idem that the Corporation must take necessary steps for removal of the offending structures which are there on the proposed development plan road. 3. We may note that the Corporation has filed an affidavit on record as late as on 5th December, 2007 stating that there are contravening structure between Final Plot Nos.878 and 879 and they had already served a notice in the year 1975 and the Corporation is proceeding with the notice in accordance with law. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.6 however stated that the said notice was not in relation to the structures between Final Plot No.878 and 879 and the same was not served upon the said respondent and this pleading on facts is kept open. The Corporation is obviously at liberty to proceed in accordance with law and consider all the controversies raised by the - = : 3 : = - respondent No.6 before us. 4. We dispose of this petition with the observations that the Corporation shall take action as stated in the affidavit relating to structures on plot No.878 and 879 and to which the respondent No.6 would be entitled to take up such pleas as may be judicially available to them. As far as the offending structures on the Development Plan Road are concerned, the Corporation shall take immediate steps in accordance with law. 5. Petition is accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE CHIEF JUSTICE CHIEF JUSTICE J.P.DEVADHAR, J. J.P.DEVADHAR, J. J.P.DEVADHAR, J.