25-IA-1292-2023.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1292 OF 2023 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 8 OF 2020 Chandarao V. Jaddu & Ors. .....Applicants Versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. .....Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (LODGING) NO. 22373 OF 2023 IN INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1292 OF 2023 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 8 OF 2020 Dashrath Rajaram Sawant & Ors. .....Applicants Versus Chandarao V. Jaddu & Ors. .....Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (LODGING) NO. 23166 OF 2023 IN INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1292 OF 2023 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 8 OF 2020 Ramesh Hariba Patil & Ors. .....Applicants Versus Chandarao V. Jaddu & Ors. .....Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (LODGING) NO. 22273 OF 2023 IN Wakodikar 1/7 RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR Digitally signed by RUPALI RAJESH WAKODIKAR Date: 2026.10.05 11:05:06 +0530 25-IA-1292-2023.doc INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 1292 OF 2023 IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 8 OF 2020 Sanjay Sitaram Mithbavkar & 25 Ors. .....Applicants Versus Chandarao V. Jaddu & Ors. .....Respondents ..... Mr. Enamul Khan, for the Applicant in IA/1292/2023, IAL/22373/2023, IAL/23166/2026. Mr. Sarosh Krishnan i/b Mr. Enamul Haq for the Applicant in IAL/22273/2023. Mr. Jagdish G. Aradwad (Reddy) for the Respondent No.2 in IA/1292/2023. Mr. Ashish Kamat, Senior Advocate with Ms. Simantini Mohite a/w Mr. A.R.Mishra for the Respondent No.2. Smt. Usha Rahi, A.G.P for the Respondent – State. Ms. R.M.Hajare for the Respondent – BMC. ..… CORAM : M. S. KARNIK & SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ. DATE : 30th SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C.:- 1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants. 2. We are not referring to the facts in detail. Suffice it to observe that order dated 17th May, 2021 in Interim Application (Lodging) Wakodikar 2/7 25-IA-1292-2023.doc No.8064/2020, this Court passed the following order : “1. The amount payable towards arrears of rent / compensation by the developer to the tenants was forwarded to the Advocate for the Petitioners. However, the tenants have not accepted the same on the ground that the amount of arrears payable to them is much more than what was sought to be paid to them. The said amount will be again handed over to the Advocate for the Petitioners before 19th May, 2021. The amount forwarded to the Petitioners and accepted by them towards arrears shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. The monthly payments due to tenants/slum dwellers who are held eligible as per Annexure II, towards rent / compensation will be paid to them by the developer from March 2021 upto 31 May, 2021 on or before 24th May, 2021. Thereafter, they will be paid monthly rent / compensation on or before the 10th day of each month. All such amounts shall be paid and accepted without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. The developer undertakes to make payments from March, 2021 onwards to the other slum dwellers immediately upon them being held eligible. The Competent Authority shall within a period of two weeks from today decide the eligibility of the Petitioners who are not held eligible, after considering the further documents, if any, provided by the Advocate for the Petitioners. 2. Stand over to 9th June, 2021.” 3. Several interim applications have been filed in a disposed of contempt petition contending that the applicants therein are eligible Wakodikar 3/7 25-IA-1292-2023.doc slum dwellers and are entitled to the accommodation as well as transit rent. 4. We have heard learned Counsel for the applicants at some length. 5. As indicated earlier, so far as the applicant in IA/1292/2023 are concerned, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Kamat appearing for the developer submitted that after the disposal of the contempt petition, the petitioner Nos.7, 14, 16, 17 and 19 have been handed over the alternate premises in February, 2023. Even the rents till July, 2023 are paid to them. Subsequently, even the applicant No.4 Arjun Krushna Rawale has been handed over the alternate accommodation i.e. rehab tenament. Likewise, the applicant Nos.15, 18 and 20 have been handed over the rehab tenaments. Learned Senior Advocate submitted that this was because the eligibility was decided in their favour. 6. So far as the applicant Nos.1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 to 13, 21 and 22 are concerned, they are held to be not eligible. It is the contention of the learned Counsel for the applicants that these applicants have been Wakodikar 4/7 25-IA-1292-2023.doc wrongly held to be ineligible. However, it is not possible for us to go into this question in a disposed of contempt petition. If the applicants have any grievance, it is for them to challenge their ineligibility before the Competent Forum i.e. the A.G.R.C. 7. Our attention is invited to the order dated 12th August, 2026 in IA/3595/2024 in WP/1379/2024, where in respect of the very same scheme, this Court passed the following order : “1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 2. By this Petition, the relief prayed by the Petitioners is to direct the MCGM i.e. Competent Authority to immediately submit certified copy of the revised list of Annexure-II issued by MCGM, as per the order of this Court dated 1" March, 2011 passed in the Writ Petition No. 1001 of 2010. 3. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No.6 submits that revised Annexure - II was already issued in the year 2014. However, according to the learned Counsel for the Petitioners, the same is not revised Annexure II in terms of the order, but it was in fact a supplementary Annexure. 4. We find that since in any case, Annexure II has been issued by the MCGM, if the Petitioners have any grievance regarding the same, the Petitioners have an efficacious statutory remedy of approaching the AGRC. We find that this Petition has been filed Wakodikar 5/7 25-IA-1292-2023.doc bonafide and therefore, even the learned Counsel for the Respondents fairly submitted that in case, an appeal is filed before the AGRC by the Petitioners within a period of 4 weeks from today, the ground of delay shall not be raised. We request the AGRC to entertain the appeal on its own merits. 5. The learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent No.6 raised an objection of locus of the Petitioners. All these contentions and other contentions of other parties are kept open to be raised before the AGRC. 6. With the above observations, Writ Petition is disposed of. 7. In view of disposal of the petition, nothing survives in the Interim Application. Interim Application is disposed of accordingly.” 8. Thus, so far as eligibility is concerned, if the concerned applicants have approached the A.G.R.C, we request the A.G.R.C to decide the appeals, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of 12 weeks from the date of communication of this order. 9. In respect of those applicants who have not yet filed the appeals, it is open for such applicants to file appeals challenging their ineligibility before the A.G.R.C. If the appeals are filed within a period of four weeks, the developers shall not raise any objection of limitation. Considering that the petitioners have been litigating for a Wakodikar 6/7 25-IA-1292-2023.doc considerable length of time, the A.G.R.C is requested to decide the appeals expeditiously and preferably within the aforesaid period of 12 weeks from the date of filing of the appeal. 10. The applicants as well as the developers to co-operate with the A.G.R.C in the expeditious disposal of the said appeals and shall not seek any adjournment. 11. All contentions as to the eligibility are kept open. 12. It is open for the applicants to make appropriate application for interim reliefs before the A.G.R.C. 13. All the applications are disposed of accordingly. (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.) Wakodikar 7/7