1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.232 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1152 OF 2002 CitiSpace and others. ..Petitioners. Versus State of Maharashtra and others. ..Respondents. And M/s.Shivalik Ventures Pvt. Ltd., ..Respondent in Notice of Motion. ... Mr.Aspi Chinoy, Advocate with Mr.Jariwala & Mr.Menon, Advocate i./b. Thakore Jariwala & Associates for the petitioners. Mr. Ravi Kadam, Advocate General with Mr.G.D. Utangale, Advocate i/b. M/s.Utangale & Co. for respondent No.2 (SRA). Ms.Madhulata Kajale, A.G.P. for respondent No.1. Mr.B.V. Phadnis, For respondent in Notice of Motion No.232 of 2009. ... CORAM : BILAL NAZKI AND SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ. DATE : 10th JUNE, 2009. P.C. :- 1. This Petition was mainly filed in public interest on the ground that certain lands, which are kept open land in the plan, are being encroached resulting in creation of slums. While entertaining this Petition, the Court passed an order on 31st July, 2002, which reads thus: “Heard parties. Respondent No.2 is directed to file an affidavit disclosing necessary information as claimed in prayer clauses (c)(i) of (xiii) of the Writ Petition. Adjourned for four weeks. In the meantime, until further orders, no new 2 rehabilitation scheme be sanctioned without the permission of this Court in respect of the open spaces which are reserved for gardens, parks, playgrounds, recreational spaces, maidans, no development zones, pavements, roads and carriage ways.” 2. Now, a notice of motion has been moved, in which it is stated that the order of this Court was that no land which is reserved for gardens, parks, playgrounds, recreational spaces, maidans, no development zones, pavements, roads and carriage ways should be utilized for new rehabilitation scheme under the Slum Rehabilitation Act without further orders of this Court. 3. The minutes of the order have been placed before us, which show that the area reserved for gardens, parks, playgrounds, recreational spaces, maidans, no development zones, pavements, roads and carriage ways would be protected though within the plot there may be some reallocation. 4. In such circumstances, we do not find any objection for allowing the scheme as envisaged under the minutes of the order placed before us. The said minutes of order are taken on record and marked “Y” for identification. 5. We, accordingly order in terms of the minutes of the order filed by the parties. The developers shall abide by the undertaking given in the minutes of the order. 6. Notice of Motion is disposed of, accordingly. [BILAL NAZKI,J.] [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]