Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 6891 (BOM)

LAXMAN NARAYAN LAD v. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER SLUM REHABILITATION AUTHORITY (SRA)

WP/4161/2026 · 2026-09-03

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

904-WP-4161-2026 WITH IA(L)-24942-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4161 OF 2026 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO. 24942 OF 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4161 OF 2026 Mr. Laxman Narayan Lad .....Petitioner Versus The Chief Executive Officer and Ors. .....Respondents ..... Ms. Renuka Sarswat a/w Mr. Amitabh Azad, Mr. Rajesh Kalote, Mr. Shashikant Patil and P. Sakthivel i/b Amitri Lex, for the Petitioner. Mr. Jagdish G. Aradwad (Reddy), for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2- SRA. Mr. Ajit Hon a/w Mr. Atharva Deshmukh i/b PNP & Associates, for the Respondent No.6. ..… CORAM : M. S. KARNIK & SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ. DATE : 3rd SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C.:- 1. The Petitioner has alternate efficacious remedy where the Petitioner’s grievance needs to be agitated. The Petitioner has directly approached this Court. 2. It is the submission of learned Counsel for the Petitioner that even without conducting a proper and independent survey, Manisha 1/3 MANISHA BALKRISHNA TALEKAR Digitally signed by MANISHA BALKRISHNA TALEKAR Date: 2026.09.08 11:14:07 +0530 904-WP-4161-2026 WITH IA(L)-24942-2026.doc verification of Petitioner’s claims of individual hutment and rehabilitation benefits in accordance with the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971, the Petitioner is being denied the rehabilitation. It is the submission of learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner is suffering as a result of inaction on the part of the Respondents. 3. The Petitioner has filed an application dated 20th March, 2024 in Form 3 for conducting an independent verification of the Petitioner’s claim of individual hutment and rehabilitation benefits in accordance with the Slums Act and which is pending. 4. The only relief that we can grant at this stage in the facts and circumstances of the present case is direction to Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to decide the pending claim of the Petitioner as mentioned in prayer Clause (a) of the Petition expeditiously and in any case within a period of six weeks from the date of production of this Order. In case the Petitioner aggrieved, it is always open for the Petitioner to take recourse to appropriate statutory remedies challenging such Order or any other relief. The decision be communicated to the Petitioner. Manisha 2/3 904-WP-4161-2026 WITH IA(L)-24942-2026.doc 5. Keeping all contentions of the parties open, Writ Petition No.4161 of 2026 stands disposed of. 6. In view of disposal of Writ Petition, Interim Application (L) No.24942 of 2026 also stands disposed of. (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.) Manisha 3/3