IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2560 OF 2008 Rampratap Rajdeo Singh ... Petitioner Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and others. ... Respondents Ms. V.V. Thorat for the petitioner. Ms. Geeta Jogalekar for the BMC. Mr. P.K. Dhakephalkar, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. R.R. Sharma for the respondent Nos.5 to 7. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. DATE : 18TH MARCH, 2009 P.C.: The contention raised before us by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that even after some demolition of the building in question has taken place, there has been reconstruction again. According to her, it is prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner and irreparable inconvenience is being caused to petitioner. 2. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the Corporation submits that they have taken action in accordance with law and it is also stated in their affidavit that there is no reply to the fact as to whether the construction has been raised again by the private respondents. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the private respondents, however, contend that they have already filed a suit against the Corporation for reconstruction of the building as it was demolished illegally and without following due process of law. 4. Be that as it may, we are aware that we are exercising the jurisdiction in the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and it may not be possible for this court to examine the rights and contentions which are founded on facts of the case and the evidence by each of the parties before the court. However, the public authority is expected to discharge its duties in accordance with law and need not show helplessness wherever unauthorised constructions are raised. In these circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition with the direction to the Corporation to inspect the site after notice to the parties. If the Corporation finds that unauthorised construction which was demolished has been reconstructed, it shall take steps in accordance with law. Rest of the controversies raised including the question of title, if any, are left to be decided in the suit already filed by the private respondents, the petitioner may take such other legal proceedings which are permissible in accordance with law. Writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.