Union Minister Narayan Rane has moved the Bombay High Court seeking directions to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) to consider the new application seeking regularisation of his bungalow at Juhu in Mumbai. .The BMC had earlier rejected Rane's first such application on June 3. When the plea in relation to second application came up for hearing, the bench of Justices RD Dhanuka and Kamal Khata queried whether a second such application under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation(MMC) Act would be maintainable in the first place. Advocates Shardul Singh for the petitioner and Senior Advocate Anil Sakhare for the BMC were directed to specifically address the Court on this issue, after which the Court would hear the petition on merits.The Bench granted the counsel time till July 25 to decide on the application. .The petition was filed through Kaalkaa Real Estates, a company owned by Rane’s family. The company filed the fresh regularisation application before BMC under Section 342 of the MMC Act which stipulates notifying the Commissioner for making any alteration or addition to an existing building. With the new application, the company claimed benefit of the Floor Space Index (FSI) upto 4 FSI on the proposed land component as per the Development Control and Promotion Regulation (DCPR). The petitioner sought directions so that the planning department within BMC decides the new application uninfluenced by the orders passed by BMC including the rejection of the retention application.BMC had issued a notice to Kaalkaa Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. in March directing it to remove the alleged unauthorised work on the premises within 15 days failing which the corporation will demolish those portions and recover the charges from the owners/ occupiers.This notice was challenged before the High Court pursuant to which the Court had protected the structure from demolition till June 24, until the regularisation application by Rane was heard by BMC.Subsequently, the regularisation application was rejected by the BMC on June 3. Since the protection granted by the High Court was expiring soon, Rane moved High Court seeking urgent relief. On June 23, the High Court rejected Rane’s petition challenging the rejection order.Rane has now moved the High Court seeking that BMC decide his second application without influence of its earlier orders. .Singh argued today that there is no prohibition under the MMC Act and Maharashtra Regional Town Planning (MRTP) Act or the DCPR from filing fresh or renewed application for building permission. He claimed that the earlier application had been filed under a different provision and the new application has been filed taking into consideration the plot area as was originally factored for granting the first permission which led to the Occupation Certificate. It also calculated the permissible FSI in terms of the DCPR 2034 without sub-division of the land. He contended that non-consideration of the new application would violate the fundamental rights of the petitioner company. .Sakhare meanwhile argued that the authority had only received the new application and had not applied its mind to the same. He informed the Court that the planning department of the civic authority was first going to decide if the application could be entertained. Once that decision has been taken, then they will apply their mind to the details in the application, he assured the court. .The Bench directed Sakhare to clear BMC’s stand on the issue of whether a regularisation application would be maintainable under Section 44 of the MRTP before the BMC and whether this Court ought to entertain such a petition. The matter will be heard next on July 25.