Mumbai: Today was the 29th day of the month of Shaban al-Mu’zam and at the time of sunset, an attempt was made to see the moon of the month of Ramadan, but the moon was not seen. Although the sky was completely clear and there was not even a cloud of any kind of fog, despite this, the moon of the month of Ramadan (1444 Hijri) was not seen.

announcement by the All India Sunni Jamiat Ulama and Sunni Ruiyyatt Hilal Committee.

“Today dated 29th Sha’ban al-Mu’zam 1444 Hijri according to 22 March 2023, an attempt was made to see the moon of Ramadan after Maghrib prayer, but it could not be seen, nor was there a tradition from anywhere. The news of the crescent was received, so the Sunni Crescent Sighting Committee And it is announced by Sunni scholars that tomorrow 23rd March, Thursday 30th of Sha’ban is Shaban al-Mu’zam, and God willing, Friday 24th March will be the 1st of Ramadan, i.e. the first fast.”

Team Mumbai Press

 Hours before the Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS) rally, banners proclaiming party President Raj Thackeray as a ‘future CM’ came up in the vicinity of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Park in Dadar, here on Wednesday.

Raj, the estranged cousin of Shiv Sena (UBT) President and former Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, is scheduled to address a large rally this evening for which thousands of party workers have started trooping in from Nashik, Pune, Raigad and parts of Mumbai.

Setting the tone for the meeting on Gudi Padwa — the Maharashtra New Year, the MNS Dadar unit chief Laxman Patil has put up the banners conferring the status of ‘Hindu Jannayak’ and ‘The future CM in the minds of the people of Maharashtra!’

The posters have been put up opposite the Shiv Sena Bhavan — controlled by Uddhav Thackeray in what is considered a Shiv Sena (UBT) bastion.

The banners have started political tongues wagging, particularly since the 17-year-old MNS has only a lone MLA in the 288-member Assembly, despite being led by the fiery orator Raj Thackeray, the nephew of the legendary Balasaheb Thackeray.

With the entry of Raj Thackeray, 54, the wishful state ‘future CM’ platform has become more crowded and varied.

Earlier, there posters-banners heralding his nephew and Uddhav’s son, Aditya Thackeray as a ‘future CM’, then Nationalist Congress Party’s top leaders like Jayant Patil, Ajit Pawar and Supriya Sule seen straddling posters with a ‘future CM’ tag, and other leaders from different parties, including the ruling ally Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Political circles say the latest MNS manoeuvres are intended to create a strong ‘pro-Hindutva’ impression ahead of the upcoming civic election, and the Lok Sabha and Assembly polls in 2024.

Today’s Gudi Padwa rally comes a month after the split in the Shiv Sena — founded in June 1966 by the late Balasaheb Thackeray — was formalised with the original party name-symbol going to the breakaway faction headed by Chief Minister Eknath Shinde.

Though Raj Thackeray has been hobnobbing with Shinde and BJP top leaders, he has not declared his political strategy on any alliance with them so far.

The Bombay High Court has declared that clause 1.15 of the 2018 Guidelines issued by the BMC for declaring private and municipal buildings as “C-1 category (dangerous or unsafe)” does not mandate obtaining consent/ agreement from all (100%) tenants/ occupants.

It further observed that consent of 51-70% of the occupants/ tenants of the building, as applicable to the proposals made under Development Control and Promotion Regulation (DCPR)-2034, shall amount to sufficient compliance for processing development/ redevelopment proposal, for a commencement certificate (CC) to be issued.

Raj & Jain Ahuja moved court after BMC refused to grant CC for redvpt of a building saying all occupants have not agreed to sign PAAA

A bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and RN Laddha was hearing a petition by developers Raj Ahuja and Jain Ahuja, challenging clause 1.15. They had approached the court after the BMC refused to grant CC saying that they had not signed a permanent alternate accommodation agreement (PAAA) with all the tenants.

“In our clear opinion, it was arbitrary for the MCGM to insist from the petitioners (developers), consent of 100% of the tenants and in its absence withhold the CC…,” said the bench.

Developers contended that not always will 100% tenants will agree to redvpt

Challenging the constitutional validity of the clause, the developers contended that it may not be always conceivable that 100% tenants agree to redevelopment. Having such a pre-condition would create serious consequences, including the project being brought to a standstill by a minority/minuscule number of tenants or members of a co-operative society.

However, the BMC justified the guidelines, stating that it’s incumbent on the corporation to safeguard the interest of the tenants.

HC’s observation in the matter

The judges emphasised, “It is a settled position in law that the interest of the minority occupants/tenants cannot be opposed to the interest of the majority occupants, as also such persons cannot foist on the owners a delay in commencement of the redevelopment work, resulting in the project cost being increased, which would be seriously prejudicial to the owners/developers and above all the majority of the occupants.”