Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Atlanta Ltd vs Thane Municipal Corp. And Ors on 17 December, 2018

Author: Revati Mohite Dere

Bench: Ranjit More, Revati Mohite Dere

                                                                            WP 10358-18.doc



Anand             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                              WRIT PETITION NO. 10358 OF 2018

         Atlanta Limited                                                 .Petitioner

                   Vs.

         The Thane Municipal Corporation, Thane & ors.                   .Respondents

         Mr. M. M. Vashi, Senior Counsel a/w Ms A. Devkar i/b. M/s. M. P.
         Vashi & Associates, for the Petitioner
         Mr. M. Limaye, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 1
         Mr. A. S. Patel & Mr. S. L. Babar, AGP, for the Respondent No. 2 -
         State
         Mr. T. J. Pandian, Advocate, for the Respondent No. 3

                           CORAM       :    RANJIT MORE &
                                            REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.
                           DATE        :    17.12.2018
         P.C.

         .                 Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.



2. The Petitioner is challenging the stop work notice dated 02.05.2018 issued by the Thane Municipal Corporation. The said stop work notice is given on the ground that the subject land belonging to the Petitioner is affected by the High Speed Bullet Train Project.

1 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/12/2018 08:57:35 ::: WP 10358-18.doc

3. Mr. Vashi, Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the main grievance of the Petitioner is that if the land in question is required for the aforesaid project then the Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 must acquire the same by following the due process of law.

4. Mr. Pandian, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 3 on instructions submits that if it is not possible to acquire the land in question by private negotiation, then appropriate procedure would be followed for acquisition of the land. Mr. Vashi, Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner submits that this is not being done expeditiously. Learned counsel for the Respondents seek time to take instructions.

5. In the above circumstances, we direct the Respondent No. 2 to submit a report stating therein that within how much time acquisition proceedings to acquire the subject land in question would be initiated.

2 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/12/2018 08:57:35 ::: WP 10358-18.doc

6. Stand over to 16.01.2019.

(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.) (RANJIT MORE, J.) 3 of 3 ::: Uploaded on - 20/12/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 27/12/2018 08:57:35 :::