1 wpl1350-11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (LODG)NO.1350 OF 2011 Anil Kishan Darade. ...Petitioner vs. The Bombay Municipal Corporation ...Respondent --- Ms.Armin Wandrewala i/b. Mr.Sutapa Saha, for Petitioner. Ms.Priti Purandare, for Respondent. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATED: 6th July,2011. P.C.:- 1. Heard. The licence for Stall no.51 which is subject matter of this petition was in the name of grandmother of the petitioner. She expired on 30.4.1995, The present petitioner s father Mr.Kisan Savleram was her son, he applied for transfer of the licence in his favour, but 2 wpl1350-11 that request was rejected on the ground that Mr.Kisan was already holding licence in relation to some other stall. The petitioner made an application for transfer of licence in his favour on 14.11.1996. The stall was removed by the Corporation on 22.4.1998. Therefore, writ petition no.879 of 1998 was filed in this Court by the present petitioner claiming that he is entitled to transfer of licence. That petition was dismissed by us by order order dated 6.8.2009. It was held that on the death of grandmother of the petitioner, as per the policy of the Corporation, transfer of licence could have been sought by the heir of the licencee. The heir of the licensee viz.Mr.Kisan sought transfer of the licence, but his application was rejected because he was already holding licence for another stall. It was held that the petitioner had made an application on 14.11.1996 when he was not the heir of his grandmother, and therefore, he was not entitled to transfer of the licence. 3 wpl1350-11 A Special Leave Petition was preferred against our order before the Supreme Court, that was dismissed on 3.12.2010. Within six days of the rejection of the Special Leave Petition, on 9.12.2010 a fresh application was made by the petitioner for transfer of the licence of Stall no.51 in his favour because, according to him, his earlier application was held, not to be maintainable because his father was alive. Now that his father has expired, according to the petitioner, he is entitled to transfer of licence. That application was rejected by the Corporation saying that as per the policy of the Corporation on the death of the licence holder, the licence can be transferred either if the licence holder leaves behind him spouse then in favour of spouse or if the licence holder leaves behind him son then in favour of son. The petitioner is neither the spouse nor the son of deceased license holder, and therefore, transfer in his favour is not possible. The present 4 wpl1350-11 petition is directed against that order. In our opinion, the application for transfer of licence granted by the Corporation in favour of a person who died in the year 1995 could not have been filed in the year 2010. Entitlement to transfer of the licence will have to be decided on the date of the death of the licence holder. The petitioner on that date was not eligible to apply, therefore, the Corporation has rightly rejected the application. The petition is,therefore, rejected. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (R.G.KETKAR, J.) ---