1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.56 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.385 OF 2008 Champak Jivraj Jain. ...Appellant vs. 1.Chief Engineer (Development Plan) & others. ...Respondents --- Mr.C.U.Singh i/b. Haresh Mehta & Co., for Appellant. Mr.V.V.Thorat, Sr. Advocate i/b. Ms.Manjusha S.Kumbhar, for Respondent no.3 in support. Mr.K.K.Singhavi, Sr. Advocate for B.M.C. Mr.Ravi Kadam, Advocate General with G.N.Utangale, for Respondent no.2. --- CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & A.A.SAYED, JJ. 2 DATED: 26th March,2009. P.C.:- 1. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides. It does appear from the material available on record that as per the S.R.A. Scheme as it stand today the structure occupied by the petitioner is not affected and it is possible that the structure of the petitioner may be required to be vacated in case the Corporation takes up road widening scheme. In our opinion, therefore, there is no reason to vacate the interim order dated 21.7.2008. However, we expressly clarify that the interim order passed in this petition operates only in relation to the structure occupied by the petitioner and that the respondents are free to carry out development according to the S.R.A. Scheme as it stands today. It is also clarified that the interim order will not come in the way of the Authorities taking up the other schemes that may be permissible under the Law in relation to the structure occupied by the petitioner. Notice of motion is disposed of. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) 3 (A.A.SAYED,J.)