hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1407 OF 2011 WITH CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 282 OF 2011 Neelkamal Realtors & Builders Pvt. Ltd. ... Petitioner Versus Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. ... Respondents Mr. I.M. Chagla, Sr.Advocate with Mr. F. Devitre, Sr. Counsel with Mr.Riyaz Chagla i/by M/s. Negandhi, Shah & Hidayatullah for the petitioner. Mr. E.P. Bharucha, Sr. Advocate with Ms. P.A. Purandare for respondent nos. 1 to 3. Mr. V.M.Parsuhrami for respondent no. 5. Mr. Hamid Mohd. Siddiq Khan intervenor in person. CORAM : P.B. MAJMUDAR & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATED : NOVEMBER 22, 2011 P.C. By way of this petition, petitioner has challenged the stop work notice issued by the Corporation as well as decision of the MHADA by 1 hvn which MHADA has taken certain objections regarding alleged construction. 2. Mr. Chhagla submits that the construction upto 42 floor is carried out. It is submitted that the Wakf Board without any basis has unnecessarily raised the dispute and because of the stop work notice, the petitioner is suffering immensely as substantial portion of the work is made. The learned Counsel Mr. Bharucha states that if the petitioner approaches the Corporation with appropriate application in connection with the stop work notice, independent decision will be taken without being influenced by the objections raised by the Wakf board in this behalf. Regarding the stop work notice, petitioner is permitted to make appropriate application to the Corporation by placing appropriate material on record. On such application being made by the petitioner, the Corporation will take appropriate decision on the same within two weeks from receipt of such application and will communicate the same to the petitioner. So far as grievance raised by the petitioner against MHADA is concerned, petitioner is directed to approach MHADA within one week from today, if no such application has already made. 2 hvn MHADA is directed to take appropriate decision on such application as early as possible and within a period of two weeks from today and the decision be communicated to the petitioner. 3. Subject to the above directions, petition is disposed of. It is clarified that in the event findings of either of the Authorities is adverse to the petitioner, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the same and take out appropriate legal proceedings. 4. So far as Chamber summons No. 282 of 2011 is concerned which is filed by the intervenor, it is clarified that if the intervenors have any any grievance in connection with the decision of the Corporation or MHADA, it will be open to them to challenge the said decision in accordance with the law. Chamber summons is also disposed of. (MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.) (P.B. MAJMUDAR,J.) 3