901-WP 3611-25.DOC Prajakta Vartak IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3611 OF 2025 Suryakumar Gaurishankaru Kanojia & Ors. ...Petitioners Versus The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai & Ors. ...Respondents _________ Mr. Amogh Singh with Mr. Santosh Pathak and Mr. Deepesh Kadam i/b. Law Origin for Petitioner. Mr. Prakhar Tandon with Ms. Rutuja Shedge i/b. Ms. Ravleen Sabharwal for Respondent/SRA. Mr. Joel Carlos with Ms. Pushpa Yadav for Respondent/BMC. Mr. Noorain Patel i/b. Diamondwala & Co. for Respondent No.6. _________ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & Dr. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE: 01 SEPTEMBER 2026. P.C. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying for the following substantive reliefs:- “a) This Hon'ble Court may allow the present Petition; b) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus thereby directing the Respondent No.1 and 2 to disclose and/or produce the records and proceeding with respect to the re-verification of the Supplementary Annexure - II dated 13th August, 2019 of the said subject slum scheme; (Exhibit-B] c) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ in the nature of Mandamus thereby directing the Respondent No.1 and 2 to disclose the Impugned undisclosed order declaring the Petitioners as ineligible as per the Affidavit in Reply undated, July, 2024 of Respondent No.3 in Writ Petition No. 7443 of 2023 in which the Petitioners were not party to the said petition and upon production of the said order/report the same may be quash and set aside; (Exh. "A") d) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to allow the Petitioners to carry 01 September 2026 PRAJAKTA SAGAR VARTAK Digitally signed by PRAJAKTA SAGAR VARTAK Date: 2026.09.02 16:59:18 +0530 901-WP 3611-25.DOC amendment in the present petition after receipt of the Order of ineligibility from the Respondent No.1, 2 and 3 for the said subject slum scheme for challenging the same.” 2. We find that, in passing the said order, the petitioners were not granted an opportunity of being heard. Hence, the said order cannot to be acted upon. The petitioners have already made representations dated 23 January 2025 and 18 March 2025 (Exhibit-D and Exhibit-E, page 63 and 78 of the paper-book, respectively) seeking redressal of their grievance and inclusion of their names in Annexure-II after being afforded an opportunity of hearing. 3. Mr. Carlos, learned counsel for the municipal corporation/respondent nos.1 to 3, on instructions, states that the order by which the petitioners’ names were deleted from Annexure II is being provided to the petitioners. He further states that, in respect of the representations made by the petitioners on 23 January 2025 and 18 March 2025, the petitioners will be granted an opportunity of hearing and appropriate orders will be passed on the petitioners’ prayer for inclusion of their names in Annexure II. Let the entire exercise be completed within a period of three weeks from today. All contentions of the parties in that regard are expressly kept open. 4. The writ petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs. (Dr. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) 01 September 2026