Download Writ Petition format and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Law in PDF only on Docsity!
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2014
District: Mumbai
Harish Jamnadas Madiyar ]… Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors ]…Respondents
I N D E X
Sr. No. Exhibit Particulars Page Nos.
Proforma/Office Notes
- Synopsis
- Writ Petition
- Vakalatnama
- Memorandum of Address
- List of documents
- ‘ A’ Exhibit ‘A’
Copy of the Plan of the said property formerly bearing Survey No. 2/3605 and adjoining properties.
- (^) ‘B’ Exhibit ‘B’
Copy of the Order dated 17 th^ May
2010 passed by the Hon’ble Charity Commissioner
- (^) ‘ C’ Exhibit ‘C’
Copy of the Deed of Conveyance dated 24 th^ May 2010
- ‘D’ Exhibit ‘D’
Copy of the Deed of Rectification dated 1 st^ November 2010.
- (^) ‘ E’
‘F’
Exhibit ‘E’ & ‘F’
Copies of the Orders so passed in the Writ Petitions
- ‘G’ Exhibit ‘G’
Copy of the letter dated 21 st^ June
2002,
12. ‘H’
‘H-1’
Exhibit ‘H’ Copy of the Letter dated 15 th
January 2013 and Exhibit ‘H-1’ is the English Translation thereof
- (^) ‘ I’ Exhibit ‘I’
Copy of the Order of MRT dated 29 th^ January 2013
- (^) ‘J’ Exhibit ‘J’
Copy of the Plan showing demarcation
- (^) ‘K’ Exhibit ‘K’
Copy of the Notice dated 25 th
March 2014.
(^16) ‘L’
‘L-1’
Exhibit ‘L’
Exhibit ‘L-1’
Newspaper report in Gujarat ‘Mumbai Samachar’ which appeared on 24 th^ January^2014
alongwith its English Translation.
- Affidavit in Support of the Petition
- Advocate Certificate
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2014
District: Mumbai
Harish Jamnadas Madiyar ]… Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors ]…Respondents
P R O F O R M A
Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Corom. Appearance Court’s orders or direction and prothonotary’s orders
Court’s or Judge’s orders
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2014
District: Mumbai
Harish Jamnadas Madiyar ]… Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors ]…Respondents
P R O F O R M A
Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Corom. Appearance Court’s orders or direction and prothonotary’s orders
Court’s or Judge’s orders
designated as such in the final layout development plan for the Mazagaon Division. The said property bearing Survey No.3/3605 was joined in and renumbered to form property bearing Cadastral Survey No. 126/1.
3. 23 rd
Aug, 1918
Petitioner states that one Rev. John Edward Robinson and one Rev. William Henry Stephen alongwith the said Christian Females Missionary to Women in Foreign Missionary Fields (through its Constituted Attorney Margaret D. Crouse) demised the said properties formerly bearing Survey No. 1/3605 and Survey No. 3/3605 to the Respondent No.4 Trust. Petitioner states that a separate Deed that was intended, proposed and claimed to be executed where under the said Christian Females Missionary and the parties demised unto the Respondent No.4 Trust the Leasehold land formerly bearing Survey No.2/ in favour and for the benefits of the Respondent No.4 Trust and its beneficiaries for which, the said Christian Missionary received a sum of Rs.15,000/- as and by way of earnest money deposit. The entire transaction, therefore, was that the said Christian Missionary had agreed to demise and so demised unto the Respondent No.4 Trust the properties formerly bearing Survey No.1/3605 (freehold) and Survey No. 3/3605 (freehold) and the property bearing Survey No. 2/3605 (leasehold land) to the Respondent No.4 Trust for the consideration of Rs.1,41,000/- in the year 1918 vide separate Deeds bearing Indenture for the freehold land and the other Deed of the leasehold land in favour of Respondent No.4 Trust. The Petitioner believes that the said land bearing Survey No.1/2605 was restricted in its user by the then appropriate government so as to declare it Pension and Tax Tenure Land.
4. 23 rd
April, 1937
Petitioner states that vide Order in terms of the Consent Decree dated 24 th February 1936 passed in Suit No. 22 of 1930 (OOCJ) duly approved and sanctioned the Scheme for administration and management of the Respondent No.4 Trust, wherein Schedule A described the Schedule of the immovable properties belonging to the Respondent No.4 Trust.
Petitioner states that said scheme as approved and sanctioned by this Hon’ble High Court under Section 34 of the Indian Trust Act, 1882 was duly recorded by the Hon’ble Charity Commissioner as reflected in Schedule I maintained under the Rules and relevant provisions of the said Act.
5. 17 th
May, 2010
Petitioner states that the Respondent No.4 Trust and the Respondent No. Developers have fraudulently and upon written misrepresentations concealed material and relevant facts before the Hon’ble Charity Commissioner while obtaining the Order dt. 17-5-2010 under Application No. J-4/59/2010 under Section 36(1)(a) of the Public Trust Act,
- The Petitioner has further come to know the Hon’ble Charity Commissioner had accorded the sanction to sell the property bearing Cadastral Survey No. 126 together with the buildings standing thereupon on ‘as is where is’ basis for a consideration of Rs.3,51,00,000/- (Rupees Three Crore Fifty One Lakhs only) as also for the other consideration being 10 rooms each admeasuring 300 sq.feet carpet area, one office premises admeasuring about 500 sq.ft carpet area and centrally Air Conditioned Auditorium for accommodating 600 persons to be transferred by the Respondent No.3 to the Respondent No.4 herein. 6. 24 th
May, 2010
Petitioner states that the Respondent No.4 Trust executed the Deed of Conveyance which was registered with the Sub-Registrar of Assurances under Sr.No. BBE-3- 5105/2010 for purportedly transferring that is absolutely selling the entire property bearing Cadastral Survey No. 126 without any reference as to which portion is actually leasehold land and held under the Indenture of Lease dated 17 - 12-1917 from the Respondent No.1.
7. 1 st^ Nov,
2010
Petitioner states that subsequently the Respondent No.4 Trust and the Respondent No.3 Developer have executed the Deed of Rectification registered under Registration No. BBE-10629-2010.
8. Petitioner^ states^ that^ the^ said^ property bearing Cadastral Survey No. 126 i.e carved out of the properties formerly bearing Survey No.1/3605 and formerly
by the said letter, the Respondent No. called upon the Respondent No. 3 & 4 to show cause within 15 days as to why the property should not be forfeited for the breach of the terms and conditions of the Indenture of Lease dated 17th^ December
12. Petitioner states that he has learnt that the Respondent No.3 has filed an application bearing No. APL.TNC.MUB.No.41 of 2013 before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (MRT) for challenging the Letter dated 15 th^ January 2013 passed by the Respondent No.2. The MRT on hearing has dismissed the said application as being premature as the Respondent No.2 has not passed any final order/injunction and has only issued a show cause notice. 13^24 th January 2014
Newspaper Report published in Mumbai Samachar
14.^25 th March 2014
Notice to the Respondent No.2 calling upon to take action in this respect.
Hence the Writ Petition.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2014
District: Mumbai
IN THE MATTER OF ARTICLE
226 and 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
And
In the matter of Letter dated
15 th^ January^2013 bearing
No. CSLR/T2/Mazgaon/LND/
2103/126/HST/2012/7394 of
the Collector, Old Custom
House, Mumbai 400 001
Harish Jamnadas Madiyar ]
Aged 39 years, Adult Indian Inhabitant ]
Residing at Room No. 23, Ground Floor, ]
69/D, Shree Kutchi Lohana Niwas ]
Compound,Shivdas Champshi Marg, ]
Mazgaon, Mumbai 400 010 ]
… Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra ]
Through the Government Pleader, ]
Original Side, High Court Mumbai ]
2. The Collector ]
Old Custom House, Shahid Bhagat Singh ]
Road, Fort, Mumbai 400 001 ]
Opp.Lok Everest, Mulund (East) ]
Mumbai 400 080 ]
5. Municipal Corporation of Greater ]
Mumbai, a corporation under the Municipal]
Corporation Act, 1888 ]
Having their office at Municipal Corporation]
Building, Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai 400 001]
6. The Assistant Commissioner ]
Having their office at Municipal Corporation]
Building, Mahapalika Marg, Mumbai 400
001] …
Respondents
TO
THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND OTHER
HONOURABLE JUDGES OF THIS HON’BLE COURT
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF
THE
PETITIONER ABOVENAMED
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:
**1. Parties:
- The Petitioner herein belongs to the Kutchi**
Lohana Caste and whose ancestors hail from
the specified areas of the Kutch Region in
Gujarat and is the tenant of the premises
more particularly described in the cause title
mentioned above and is also the beneficiary
of the Respondent No.4 Trust ‘Kutchi Lohana
Mivas Griha Mitra Mandal’. The Petitioner is
filing is filing this present Petition for and on
behalf of the Kitchi Lohana Community and
for their welfare thereof.
2. The Respondent No.1 is the State of
Maharashtra through the Respondent No.
who is the Collector, having its office at the
cause title mentioned above, while the
Respondent No.3 is the private Limited
Company carrying on the business of Builders
and Developers having its address mentioned
in the cause title above.
3. The Respondent No.4 is a registered Trust
under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950
having its addressed mentioned in the cause
title above formed for the purposes of
charitable purposes including the connected
activities thereon for the benefit of the
Kutchi Lohana Community through its
Trustees i.e Respondent No. 4(a) to (d).
4. Respondent No. 5 is the Municipal
Corporation of Mumbai and is a statutory
authority under the Municipal Corporation
Act, 1888 having their address mentioned in
the cause title above, while the Respondent
No.6 is the Assistant Commissioner so
appointed by the Respondent No.5 under
Christian Females Missionary to Women in
Foreign Missionary Fields as and when
produced. Also, annexed as Exhibit ‘A’ is a
copy of the Plan of the said property formerly
bearing Survey No. 2/3605 and adjoining
properties. The said Christian Female
Missionary to Women in Foreign Missionary
Fields had purchased the immovable formerly
bearing Survey No. 1/3605 and Survey No.
3/3605. Subsequently, the said property
Survey No.1/3605 was renumbered alongwith
the part of property bearing Survey No.2/
admeasuring 4581.95 sq.meters or thereabout
equivalent to 5479 square yards was carved
out and designated as such in the final layout
development plan for the Mazagaon Division.
The said property bearing Survey No.3/
was joined in and renumbered to form property
bearing Cadastral Survey No. 126/1.
2.3 In pursuance thereof, vide an Instrument dated
23 rd^ August 1918 one Rev. John Edward
Robinson and one Rev. William Henry Stephen
alongwith the said Christian Females
Missionary to Women in Foreign Missionary
Fields (through its Constituted Attorney
Margaret D. Crouse) demised the said
properties formerly bearing Survey No.
1/3605 and Survey No. 3/3605 to the
Respondent No.4 Trust. In this Deed there also
bears reference to a separate Deed that was
intended proposed and claimed to be executed
where under the said Christian Females
Missionary and the parties demised unto the
Respondent No.4 Trust the Leasehold land
formerly bearing Survey No.2/3605 in favour
and for the benefits of the Respondent No.
Trust and its beneficiaries for which, the said
Christian Missionary received a sum of
Rs.15,000/- as and by way of earnest money
deposit. The entire transaction, therefore, was
that the said Christian Missionary had agreed
to demise and so demised unto the
Respondent No.4 Trust the properties formerly
bearing Survey No.1/3605 (freehold) and
Survey No. 3/3605 (freehold) and the property
bearing Survey No. 2/3605 (leasehold land) to
the Respondent No.4 Trust for the
consideration of Rs.1,41,000/- in the year
1918 vide separate Deeds bearing Indenture
Dated 23/8/1918 for the freehold land and the
other Deed of the leasehold land in favour of
Respondent No.4 Trust. The Petitioner believes
that the said land bearing Survey No.1/
was restricted in its user by the then
by the Hon’ble Charity Commissioner as
reflected in Schedule I maintained under the
Rules and relevant provisions of the said Act.
The Petitioner crave leave to refer and rely
upon the true copy of the said Scheme as and
when produced including Schedule I.
2.6 The Petitioner states that the Respondent No.
Trust and the Respondent No.3 Developers
have fraudulently and upon written
misrepresentations concealed material and
relevant facts before the Hon’ble Charity
Commissioner while obtaining the Order dated
17 th^ May 2010 under Application No.
J-4/59/2010 under Section 36(1)(a) of the
Public Trust Act, 1950. The Petitioner has
further come to know the Hon’ble Charity
Commissioner had accorded the sanction to
sell the property bearing Cadastral Survey No.
126 together with the buildings standing
thereupon on ‘as is where is’ basis for a
consideration of Rs.3,51,00,000/- (Rupees
Three Crore Fifty One Lakhs only) as also for
the other consideration being 10 rooms each
admeasuring 300 sq.feet carpet area, one office
premises admeasuring about 500 sq.ft carpet
area and centrally Air Conditioned Auditorium
for accommodating 600 persons to be
transferred by the Respondent No.3 to the
Respondent No.4 herein. Hereto annexed as
Exhibit ‘B’ is the copy of the Order dated 17th
May 2010 passed by the Hon’ble Charity
Commissioner.
2.7 In pursuance to the aforesaid sanction, the
Respondent No.4 Trust executed the Deed of
Conveyance dated 24 th^ May 2010 which was
registered with the Sub-Registrar of Assurances
under Sr No. BBE-3- 5105/2010 for
purportedly transferring that is absolutely
selling the entire property bearing Cadastral
Survey No. 126 without any reference as to
which portion is actually leasehold land and
held under the Indenture of Lease dated 17th
December 1917 from the Respondent No.1.
Subsequently on 1 st^ November 2010, the
Respondent No.4 Trust and the Respondent
No.3 Developer have executed the Deed of
Rectification registered under Registration No.
BBE-10629-2010. Hereto annexed as Exhibit
‘C’ is the copy of the Deed of Conveyance
dated 24 th^ May 2010 and Exhibit ‘D’ is the
copy of the Deed of Rectification dated 1 st
November 2010.
2.8 The Petitioner state that in light of the
documents and the facts and circumstances
