13-wp4003-4005-11.doc jdk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4003 OF 2011 Usman Sajan Patel ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anrs. ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4005 OF 2011 Sugrabi Usman Patel ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anrs. ..Respondents Shri. P.A.Sarwankar i/b Sarwankar and Co. for petitioners in both the petitions Shri. S.G.Surana advocate for respondent no.4 in both the petitions Ms. Aparna Vhatkar AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 3 in both the petitions. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 20th JULY, 2011. P.C.: 1. In response to the query from the Court, the respondent no. 4 has filed an affidavit. The respondent no.4 is a Co- Operative Housing Society and the Secretary of the said Society Shri. Shamsunder Narayan Jadhav has filed an 1 13-wp4003-4005-11.doc affidavit in which it has been stated that the respondent no.4-Society is ready and willing to allow the transit tenement to the petitioners on the site or is ready and willing to pay Rs.8,000/- per month for initial period of 12 months. It is common ground that the issue of eligibility of the petitioners is still pending. Yet, the Society has decided that the petitioners can be provided temporary accommodation or compensation in lieu thereof and as and when they are held to be eligible they would be given a rehabilitation tenement of the same area as has been made available to other eligible occupants. This will be their permanent alternate accommodation. This would be provided free of costs and on ownership basis. In the light of this statement, I do not see how any prejudice is caused to the petitioners even they are evicted during the course of implementation of the scheme. They are going to be provided with transit accommodation or compensation in lieu thereof. The transit accommodation is on the same premises. In these circumstances and when the issue of eligibility of the petitioner is still pending, by accepting the statement made in this affidavit as undertaking to this Court subject writ petitions can be disposed of. They are disposed of in the light of the statements which are accepted as undertakings to this Court. At this stage, Mr. 2 13-wp4003-4005-11.doc Sarwankar appearing on behalf of the petitioners states that four weeks time may be granted to the petitioners to shift to the temporary/transit accommodation and they will vacate the premises on their own after expiry of this period. They are seeking this concession because of the monsoon season and bearing in mind the difficulties of immediate shifting out from the said premises. 2. Mr. Surana appearing on behalf of respondent no.4 states that all persons who are required to vacate, have already vacated their existing premises and the petitioners have been repeatedly requested to shift to the transit accommodation and therefore, this Court should not grant time as sought by the petitioners. 3. After hearing both sides on this aspect and bearing in mind the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, interest of justice would be served if time of three weeks is granted to both the petitioners to vacate their existing premises and if they fail to do so, the authorities can evict them in accordance with law. Three weeks time is granted from today to the petitioners to vacate the premises. 4. Writ petitions are disposed off in the above terms. No costs. [ S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. ] 3