{1} wp955010.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.9550 OF 2010 Mrs.Shalini w/o Diliprao Udhan, age: 36 years, Occ: Household, R/o Plot No.39, N-5/H, CIDCO, New Aurangabad. Petitioner Versus City & Industrial Development Corporation, Udyog Bhavan, New Aurangabad, through its Administrator, CIDCO, Aurangabad. Respondents Mr. A.V.Indrale Patil, advocate for the petitioner Mr. A.S.Bajaj, advocate for the respondent. CORAM : B.R.GAVAI AND R.M.BORDE, JJ. DATE : 16 th December, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per R.M.Borde, J.): 1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2 The petitioner is seeking directions against Respondent-Cidco for issuance of no objection for occupancy certificate in respect of plot No.39, H-Sector, N-5, Cidco, {2} wp955010.odt Aurangabad. 3 It is contended that the plot was initially allotted to one Dnyaneshwar Jagannath Shinde and, therefore, agreement to lease came to be executed between said Shinde and Respondent-Cidco in the year 1980. The building plan submitted by the earlier owner was approved by the Cidco by way of communication dated 13.02.1982. The petitioner entered into agreement to sale with earlier owner Shri Shinde and deed of assignment came to be executed on 18.03.1998 and agreement to sale was executed on 20.03.1998 and as such, petitioner became owner of the said plot. The petitioner thereafter resumed construction and completed the same in the year 2010. The petitioner contends that because of paucity of funds, he could not complete the construction within stipulated period. The petitioner, as such, tendered an application to the Cidco authorities for issuance of no objection for occupancy certificate. However, Respondent-Cidco has refused to consider the request made by the petitioner. 4 It is the contention of Respondent-Cidco that in view of the directions issued by this Court on 13.04.2004 in Civil Application No.7360/2002 in Writ Petition No.2338/1999, if a person has not completed construction within a period of one year, the completion/occupancy certificate cannot be granted. {3} wp955010.odt 5 However, on consideration of the circumstances stated in the petition, the petitioner has made out a case for sympathetic consideration and for granting relaxation from the conditions imposed while disposing of the said Civil Application. This Court, while dealing with Writ Petition No.5116 of 2010, has entertained such request and issued directions to the Cidco authorities to issue no objection for completion/occupancy certificate. In our view, this is a fit case for granting indulgence in favour of the petitioner. 6 In this view of the matter, writ petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (B). It is needless to mention that if, in accordance with the rules and regulations, the petitioner is required to pay any penalty / charges, he shall deposit the same with the Respondent-authorities and on making compliance of such conditions, the Respondent authorities shall issue no objection for completion/occupancy certificate in favour of the petitioner. 7 Rule is accordingly made absolute. In the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be no order as to costs. R.M.BORDE B.R.GAVAI JUDGE JUDGE adb/wp955010