8-WP.482.2025.doc Salunke IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 482 OF 2025 Aryadeep Investment and Holding } Private Limited & Anr. } Petitioners Versus Municipal Corporation of Greater } Mumbai & Ors. } Respondents Mr. Bhavin Gada with Mr. Aditya Tawde i/b. Solicis Lex, Advocates for the Petitioners. Ms. K. H. Mastakar, Advocate for Respondents-BMC. Ms. Darshna Naval (through VC), Advocate for Respondent No. 3. CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J. DATE : 22nd SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. By the instant Writ Petition, the Petitioners pray for the following substantive reliefs: - “(a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of mandamus or a Writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, thereby calling upon and directing the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to process the written complaints dated 21st October 2024, at Exhibit “B” hereto, addressed by the Advocates for the Petitioners to them, on merits, and/or submit a detailed report in relation thereto before this Hon’ble Court in a time bound manner as it may decide in its sole and absolute discretion. (b) That after processing of the aforesaid written complaint dated 21/10/2024, at Exhibit “B” hereto and consideration of the detailed report to be submitted by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 thereon as per prayer clause (a) hereinabove or otherwise, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or pass any other order or direction of a like nature, thereby calling upon and directing the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of the MMC Act and the MRTP Act against the said illegalities qua the said Property, as detailed in Paragraph No. 4 1 JAYANT VISHWANATH SALUNKE Digitally signed by JAYANT VISHWANATH SALUNKE Date: 2026.09.23 11:19:35 +0530 8-WP.482.2025.doc hereof, and the Respondent No. 3.” 3. The learned Counsel for the Petitioners submits that a detailed complaint/representation filed by the Petitioners on 21st October 2024 has still not been considered/decided by the Competent Authority of the Municipal Corporation. In this regard, the learned Counsel for the Petitioners seeks to rely upon certain documents, which he wants to place on record. 4. The learned Counsel for the contesting Respondent submits that the complaint filed by the Petitioners is vague and without any substance, as the Respondent No. 3 is the bona fide purchaser under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). 5. Considering the factual situation that has emerged before us, we are not inclined to advert into the merits of the matter. In case the Petitioners file a fresh Application/Representation along with all relevant documents within a period of two weeks from today, the Competent Authority of the Respondents shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter, after according due opportunity of hearing to all the stakeholders. 6. With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition is Disposed Of. 7. This order is passed with due assistance of Ms. K. H. Mastakar, the learned Counsel for the Respondents-BMC. [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE] 2