Disposed

Mohammad Hisham Osmani Mohammad Yusuf Osmani v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC23 Aug 2017WP/10333/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of numerous writ petitions and PILs filed against the State and Aurangabad Municipal Corporation regarding unauthorized structures. The Court directed the Committee to proceed with the implementation calendar and Government Resolutions, relying on an affidavit and calendar filed by the Corporation.

What did the court decide?

Direct the Committee to proceed with the calendar of operation (Exh.RA-1) and act in accordance with Government Resolutions.

Mohammad Hisham Osmani Mohammad Yusuf Osmani Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

wp1982.10, etc.

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1982 OF 2010

¶5

1.	Shri Kalyan Bharatrao Patil, Age: 35 years, Occu: Agril., and Press Reporter, R/o Datta Colony and Treasurer of dattadham Ashram Mandir, Datta Colony, Kannad, District Aurangabad
2.	Shri Pundalik s/o Fakirrao Aaher, Age: 65 years, Occu: Agril., R/o. Shrirammandir, Pishor Road, Kannad, and Secretary of Shrirammandir Trust, Kannad, District Aurangabad
3.	Shri Kisan s/o Parbat Chavan, Age: 72 years, Occu: Retd. Govt. Servant, R/o. Shantinagar, & President of Navchaitanya Hanuman Dharmik Va Sanskrutik Trust, Kannad, District Aurangabad
4.	Shri Uttamgir s/o Hiragir Giri, Age: 67 years, Occu: Agril., R/o Gajanan colony and Administrator of Ganpati Mandir Gajanan Colony, Kannad
5.	Gulabrao Bhagwantrao Pawar, Age: 67 years, Occu: Agril., R/o. Navjeevan Colony, Hiwarkheda Road, Kannad, District Aurangabad
6.	Shri Rajesh Dhanraj Bhartiya, Age: 35 years, Occu: Business, R/o Sinchan Colony, Kannad, District Aurangabad
7.	Arun s/o Rajaram Badkhe, Age: 30 years, Occu: Agril., R/o Saraswati Colony, Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad

¶6

	wp1982.10, etc. (2)
8.	Shri Sunil Ramrao Shivade, Age: 35 years, Occu: Social work, R/o. Bholeshwar Colony, Kannad, District Aurangabad
9.	Nathu s/o Keshav Shinde, Age: 66 years, Occu: Agril., R/o. Shivnagar, Kannad, District Aurangabad
10.	Dayaram s/o Hasanrao Patil, Age: 67 years, Occu: Pensioner, R/o. Bholeshwar Colony, Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad ..PETITIONERS
	VERSUS
1.	The State of Maharashtra, Through Revenue & Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400 032
2.	The Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
3.	The Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
4.	The Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad
5.	The District Collector, Aurangabad
6.	Tahsildar, Kannad, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad
7.	Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Kannad, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS
Mr S Mrs Mr S	. S. Thombre, Advocate for petitioners; M. A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 6; . S. Shete, Advocate for respondent No.7

¶7

WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2108 OF 2010

¶8

	(3)	wp1982.10, etc.
1.	Sanjay s/o Rangrao Dhanwal, Age: 36 years, Occu: Agril. and social work, R/o Undangaon, Tq. Sillod, Dist. Aurangabad
2.	Kanayyiah s/o Dagdu Basaiyye, Age: 60 years Occu: Agril., R/o Undangaon, Tq. Sillod, Dist. Aurangabad	..PETITIONERS
	VERSUS
1.	The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32
2.	The Collector, Aurangabad, Aurangabad
3.	The Tahsildar, Sillod, Tq. Sillod, Dist. Aurangabad
4.	The Sarpanch, Grampanchayat, Undangaon, Tq. Sillod, Dist.Aurangabad
5.	The Executive Engineer, Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad
6.	The President, Maharashtra State Wakf Board, Panchakki, Near Aurangabad Medical College & Hospital, (Ghati), Aurangabad
7.	The President, Jama Masjid, Undangaon, Tq. Sillod, Dist. Aurangabad
8.	Sau. Tarabai Shantilal Bassaiyye, Age: Major, Occu: Household and Member of Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad, R/o Village Undangaon, Tq. Sillod, Dist. Aurangabad	..RESPONDENTS

¶9

Mr S. D. Joshi, Advocate for petitioners; Mrs M. A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3; Mr R. G. Joshi, Advocate for respondent No.4; Mr Mustafa Gulam Ali, Advocate for respondent No.6

wp1982.10, etc.

(4)

WITH

WRIT PETITION NO.9974 OF 2017

¶14

Shai Age:	kh Rashid s/o Shaikh Karim, 75 years, Occu: Business and
Muta Allau	walli of Chilla and Dargah Hazrat ddin Sahib, N-5, Sahyadrinagar,
CID Chill N-5, Aura	CO, Aurangabad, R/o beside Dargah a and Dargah Hazrat Allauddin Sahib, Sahyadrinagar, CIDCO, ngabad ..PETITIONER
	VERSUS
1.	State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Revenue and Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai
2.	Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Through its Commissioner, Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Town Hall, Aurangabad
3.	Maharashtra State Board of Waqfs, Through its Chief Executive Officer, Having its head office at Panchakki, Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS
Mr S Mrs	haikh Kayyum Najir, Advocate for petitioner; M. A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent No.1;
Mr S	. S. Tope, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶15

	WITH WRIT PETITION NO.8668 OF 2012
1.	Santoshpuri s/o Sompuri Gosavi, Age: 45 years, Occu: Service, R/o. N-11-A-108-04, HUDCO, Aurangabad
2.	Shantaram s/o Jijaba Watpade, Age: 72 years, Occu: Nil, R/o. N-11-A-103-01, HUDCO, Aurangabad
3.	Jagdish s/o Digambarrao Kulkarni, Age: 53 years, Occu: Service, R/o. N-11-A-109-01, HUDCO, Aurangabad

¶16

wp1982.10, etc. (5)

¶17

4.	Sakharam s/o Taterao Ghuge, Age: 42 years, Occu: Service, R/o. as above
5.	Smt. Vidya w/o Devidas Sarode, Age: 65 years, Occu: Household, R/o. N-11-A-102-04, HUDCO, Aurangabad ..PETITIONERS
	VERSUS
1.	The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
2.	The Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad Through its Commissioner
3.	Administrator, CIDCO, Aurangabad
4.	Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad
5.	Sudarshan Nagar Saibaba Vikas Pratishthan, Through its President Ramesh s/o Gambhirrao Jadhav, Age: 56 years, Occu: Nil, R/o. N-11-A-99-04, HUDCO, Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS
Mr S. Mrs M Mr S.	V. Jaigude, Advocate for petitioners; . A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 & 4; S. Tope, Advocate for respondent No.2;
Mr A.	S. Bajaj, Advocate for respondent No.3;
Mr M.	B. Vaishnav, Advocate for respondent No.5

¶18

WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.14 OF 2012

¶19

Sameer s/o Subhash Rajurkar, Age: 35 years, Occu: Agriculture, Business and social work, R/o. Plot No.13, Shriram Colony, Samarth Nagar, Aurangabad, Taluka and District Aurangabad ..PETITIONER

wp1982.10, etc.

(6)

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Development, M. S. Mantralaya, Mumbai-32

¶24

The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, M. S. Mantralaya, Mumbai-32

¶25

The Commissioner, Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad

¶26

The Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad

¶27

The District Collector, Aurangabad

¶28

The Assistant Director of Town Planning, Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad

¶29

The Administrative Officer, Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad

¶30

The Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd., Through its Chief Engineer, Jubili Park, Aurangabad (MSEDCL)

¶31

G.T.L., Flat No.4, above Y-3 Ford Showroom, Cannaught Garden, CIDCO, Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS

¶32

Mr Rajendra S. Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioner; Mrs M. A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1, 2, 4 & 5; Mr S. S. Tope, Advocate for respondent No.3, 6 & 7; Mr S. M. Godsay, Advocate for respondent No.8

¶33

WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.20 OF 2012

¶34

Kabir Buddhapriya Arjun, Age: 42 years, Occu: social work, R/o. Raje Sambhaji Colony, Jadhav Wadi, Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad ..PETITIONER

wp1982.10, etc.

(7)

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Department of Home and Urban Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032

¶39

The Principal Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Mantralaya, Mumbai

¶40

The Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai

¶41

The Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad

¶42

The Collector, Aurangabad

¶43

The Police Commissioner, Aurangabad

¶44

Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad, Through its Municipal Commissioner

¶45

The Commissioner, Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS

¶46

Mr Pradeep Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioner; Mrs M. A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 6; Mr S. S. Tope, Advocate for respondent Nos.7 & 8

¶47

WITH

¶48

WRIT PETITION NO.10035 OF 2017

¶49

Jai hanuman Sevabhavi Visvsth Mandal, Aurangabad Through its President Nilkanth Nivrutti Musane, Age: 51 years, Occu: Agril., R/o. Plot No.33, Galli No.1, New Hanuman Nagar, Aurangabad ..PETITIONER

¶50

wp1982.10, etc. (8)

¶51

VERSUS

¶52

1.	The Maharashtra State, Through Chief Secretary, Mantralaya, Mumbai
2.	The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032
3.	The Division Commissioner, Aurangabad
4.	The Police Commissioner, Aurangabad
5.	The Superintendent of Police, Aurangabad
6.	The Collector, Aurangabad
7.	The Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS

¶53

Mr Sandeep B. Rajebhosale, Advocate for petitioner; Mrs M. A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 6; Mr S. S. Tope, Advocate for respondent No.7 WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.72 OF 2017

¶54

Renukadas @ Raju S/o Dattopant Vaidya, Age 48 years, Occ. Corporator R/o Zambad Estate, Chetna Nagar, Aurangabad District Aurangabad ..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32 2. The Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad, through its Commissioner

¶55

wp1982.10, etc.

¶56

(9)

¶57

The Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad (City), Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS

¶58

Mr S.S. Thombre, Advocate for petitioner; Mrs M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 & 3 Mr S.S. Tope, Advocate for respondent no.2

¶59

WITH

¶60

WRIT PETITION NO.10041 OF 2017

¶61

Usman Khan Habib Khan, Age 38 years, Occ. Care Taker of Dargah Syed Sadat situated at Government Arts and Science College, Near Mardana Hall, Aurangabad, Tal. & District Aurangabad ..PETITIONER

¶62

VERSUS

¶63

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad, Tal.& District Aurangabad

¶64

The Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad (City), Tal. & District Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS

¶65

Mr S.B. Solanke, Advocate for petitioner; Mrs M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 & 3 Mr S.S. Tope, Advocate for respondent no.2

¶66

WITH

¶67

WRI T PETITION NO.10333 OF 2017

¶68

Mohammad Hisham Osmani s/o Mohammad Yusuf Osmani, Age : 39 years, Occ. Agriculture, R/o House No.1-9-50, Jaisingpura, Aurangabad ..PETITIONER

¶69

VERSUS

¶70

wp1982.10, etc. (10)

¶71

The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32 2. The Collector, Aurangabad 3. The Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Through Municipal Commissioner, Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS Mr S.S. Kazi, Advocate for petitioner; Mrs M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 & 2; Mr S.S. Tope, Advocate for respondent no.3

¶72

WITH WRIT PETITION NO.10036 OF 2017

¶73

Shri. Vyankatraman Govind Shri Balaji Sansthan, Tilak Nagar, Aurangabad through its Chairman, Prakash s/o Dattatraya Kulkarni, Age : 67 years, Occ. Pensioner, R/o Tilak Nagar, Aurangabad, Tal. & District Aurangabad ..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32 2. The Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad, through its Commissioner 3. The Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad (City), Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS Mr S.S. Thombre, Advocate for petitioner; Mrs M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 & 3; Mr S.S. Tope, Advocate for respondent no.2

¶74

WITH

¶75

WRIT PETITION NO.9927 OF 2017

¶76

wp1982.10, etc.

¶77

(11)

¶78

Maharashtra State Board of Wakfs, Through its Chief Executive Officer, O/a Panchakki, Aurangabad

¶79

..PETITIONER

¶80

VERSUS

¶81

Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Through its Commissioner, Aurangabad

¶82

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai ..RESPONDENTS

¶83

Mr V.J. Dixit, Senior Advocate, instructed by S.V. Dixit, Advocate for petitioner;

¶84

Mr S.S. Tope, Advocate for respondent no.1; Mrs M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent no.2

¶85

WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 89 OF 2014 IN

¶86

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 14 OF 2012

¶87

Maharashtra State Board of Wakf, through its Chief Executive Officer, At Panchakki, Aurangabad

¶88

..PETITIONER

¶89

VERSUS

¶90

Samir s/o Subhash Rajurkar, Age: 37 years, Occu: Agri. & Business and Social Work, R/o. Plot No.13, Shriram Colony, Samarth Nagar, Aurangabad, Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad

¶91

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Principal Secretary, Department of Urban Development, M.S. Mantralaya, Mumbai-32

¶92

The Principal Secretary, Department of Home, M.S. Mantralaya, Mumbai-32

¶93

	wp1982.10, etc.
(12)

¶94

The Commissioner, Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad

¶95

The Commissioner of Police, Aurangabad

¶96

The District Collector, Aurangabad

¶97

The Assistant Director Director of Town Planning, Aurangabad Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS

¶98

Mr Pathan Yunus Basheer, Advocate for petitioner; Mr Rajendra S. Deshmukh, Advocate fore respondent No.1; Mrs M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent no.2, 3, 5 & 6; Mr S.S. Tope, Advocate for respondent no.4, 7 & 8

¶99

CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ.

¶100

DATE : 23^rd August, 2017

¶101

P.C.

¶102

In terms of the order passed by this Court from time to time and more particularly the orders dated 8^th August, 2017 and 18^th August, 2017, the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad has filed additional affidavit-in-reply. In the additional affidavit, the detailed calender for operation and implementation of the orders passed by this Court from time to time as also of the Government Resolution dated 5^th May, 2011 has been given as per Exh.RA-1.

¶103

We have gone through the said Exh.RA-1. The Counsel appearing for the respective writ petitioners have also gone through the said Exh.RA-1.

¶104

wp1982.10, etc. (13)

¶105

Learned Counsel for the parties submit that in view of the steps which have been taken by the Corporation for removal of unauthorized and illegal structures and the calendar prepared for it, these petitions may be disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to avail the remedy as may be available to them as per the Government Resolution and in accordance with law, in case any decision is taken by the committee adverse to their interest.

¶106

Learned A.G.P. appearing for the State and learned Counsel appearing for the Corporation have also agreed to the disposal of these writ petitions in terms of the additional affidavit and the calender which has been submitted by the Corporation.

¶107

Accordingly we direct the Committee to proceed with the said calendar Exh.RA-1 and to act in accordance with the Government Resolutions dated 5^th May, 2011 and 18^th November, 2015.

¶108

With the aforesaid directions, these petitions are disposed of.

¶109

In view thereof, pending Civil Applications do not survive and stand disposed of.

¶110

(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)

¶111

amj

Mohammad Hisham Osmani Mohammad Yusuf Osmani v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Hisham Osmani Mohammad Yusuf Osmani v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jayabai Narayan Randive Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Marathwada Sarva Shramik Sanghatana through Its Joint Secretary Uddhav Namdeo Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shakera Anjum Akhter Iqbal and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rashtramata Jijau Sevabhavi Sanstha Gautam Nagar through Its President S B Bhamre and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shilpa Sachin Hodshil Vs Ahmednagar Municipal Corporation through Its Commissioner and Another

Aditya Education Trust Kala Hanuman Thana Beed through Its Chairman S M Sarda and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others