13-WP-3265-2023 (OS).DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3265 OF 2023 Daiv Laxmi SRA Co-Op Hsg. Society Ltd. ...Petitioner Versus Asst. Registrar Co-Op Societies, Eastern And Western Suburb, SRA & Ors. ...Respondents _________ Mr. Sunil J. Kanoujia a/w. Darshana Indulkar Kanoujia and Priyanka R. Kanoujia for the petitioner. Mr. Vijay D. Patil, Senior Advocate with Mr. Abhijit M. Patil for respondent no. 2-SRA. Mr. Virendra Tiwari a/w. Davina Judith for respondent no. 3. __________ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ. DATE: 28 JANUARY 2026 P.C. 1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The only prayer as made in this petition reads thus: “a) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India thereby direct the respondents to provide certified copy of Annexure-II of the petitioner.” 3. Reply affidavit on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2-Slum Rehabilitation Authority has been filed, the relevant contents of the said affidavit are required to be noted in respect of slum scheme which has already been completed and which appears to be in the year 1990. The said paragraphs reads thus: “6. Even otherwise, I say the initially a SRD scheme was implemented around early 1990s for one Kanyachapada over the land bearing CTS No. 620 (ot), Village Malad (East), Mumbai 400 063. I say that there were around 746 Slum Dwellers in the said scheme which was being implemented by respondent no. 2. 7. I say that multiple rehab buildings were constructed by the 28 January 2026 2026:BHC-OS:2503-DB 13-WP-3265-2023 (OS).DOC Respondent no. 3 over the land bearing CTS No. 620(pt), Village Malad (East), Mumbai 400 063. I say that around 9 Rehab Buildings were constructed in stages by the respondent no. 3. 8. I say that it appears that, after the construction of each rehab building and occupation of them by the Slum Dwellers, respective Societies were formed by each of the Rehab Building. I say that the Rehab Building C-1 which was constructed by the respondent no. 3 and for which O.C. was granted in the year 1996 have formed their own society and that is the petitioner herein. I say that there are around 48 members in the petitioner Society which was occupied by the Slum Dwellers from the Annexure-II of Kanyachapada. 9. Hence, I say that there is no separate Annexure-II for the petitioner Society. I say that the members of the petitioner society as mentioned on page 26 of the Writ Petition appear on the Annexure II of the Kanyachapada which comprises of 746 Slum Dwellers. I say that the copy of the Annexure- II of Kanyachapada has already been provided to the petitioner. Even Otherwise, if required I will provide 4. We accept the statement. In view of the clear statement as made in the reply affidavit and more particularly in paragraph 9, in our opinion, further adjudication of this petition is not called for. Keeping open all contentions of the parties in regard to any other proceedings which the members of the petitioner may intend to adopt, petition stands disposed of. No costs. (AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) 28 January 2026 Signed by: Vidya S. Amin Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 29/01/2026 10:59:53