Dismissed

Raghunath Waghoji Bansode v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC9 Nov 2017WP/5126/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the construction of a shopping complex in open space by an educational society. The court observed that since the development plan was approved, 15% usage for commercial purposes was permissible, unless contrary to regulations.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; rule discharged; no order as to costs.

Raghunath Waghoji Bansode Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

(Judgment) (1) W.P. No. 05126 of 2001

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶3

Writ Petition No. 05126 of 2001

¶4

District : Latur

¶5

Raghunath s/o. Waghoji Bansode,
Age : 35 years,
Occupation : Business,
R/o. Neelraj Typewriting,
Nanded Road, Latur. .. Petitioner.

¶6

versus

¶7

1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

¶8

2. The Collector, Latur, District Latur.

¶9

3. Town Planning Officer, Town Planning Office, Branch at Latur.

¶10

4. The Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Latur, District Latur.

¶11

5. Dayanand Education Society, Barshi Road, Shivaji Chowk, Latur, Dist. Latur, Through its President. .. Respondents.

¶12

...........

¶13

Mr. Pradeep G. Deshmukh, with

¶14

Mr. H.A. Joshi, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶15

Mr. A.R. Kale, Asst. Government Pleader, for respondent nos.01 to 03.

¶16

Mr. V.D. Hon, Senior Advocate, for respondent no.04.

¶17

(2)W.P. No. 05126 of 2001

¶18

(Judgment)

¶19

Smt. Anjali Dube (Bajpai), Advocate, for respondent no.05.

¶20

...........

¶21

CORAM : R.M. BORDE & SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ.

¶22

 DATE : 09TH NOVEMBER 2017

¶23

ORAL JUDGMENT [Per R.M. Borde, J.] :

¶24

01.The instant petition is presented seeking
directions to respondent nos.01 to 04 to demolish the
illegal construction of shopping complex in open
space bearing Survey No.58 and City Survey No. 5475
situated at Latur, by issuing writ of mandamus.

¶25

02.After presentation of instant petition, this
Court by virtue of interim order dated 06-02-2002,
restrained respondent no.05 - institution from
constructing further stages of shopping complex and
from allotting shops on lease basis during the
pendency of the petition. Civil Application No.
02816 of 2016 was presented seeking modification of
the order. It was pointed out that by virtue of
Government Resolution dated 02nd January 2002, the
public institutions included in public / semi-public
zone are permitted to use maximum up to 15 % of built
up area for commercial use. It is contended that the
construction raised by respondent no.05 is within the

¶26

permissible limit of 15 % of the total built up area
owned by the institute on subject site. The Society
sought permission of Municipal Council for

¶27

(Judgment) (3) W.P. No. 05126 of 2001

¶28

regularization of 63 rooms which were to be used for
commercial purpose as shopping complex on the subject
site. The municipal authority by its letter dated
18-11-2008 informed the educational Society that in
view of the policy formulated by the Government and
as per the development control regulation, the
institutes included in public - semi-public zone can
be permitted to use 15 % of the area for commercial
purposes. It was pointed out that since the draft
revised development scheme is pending for final
approval before the Government, after securing final
approval, the Society can be permitted to use said 63
rooms for commercial purpose. This Court permitted
the institution to put shutters and complete the
remaining construction on tendering an undertaking by
the Society, that on completion of construction,
remaining 23 shops would be used for academic purpose
till further orders of the court or till final
approval of the Latur city Rvised Draft Development
plan. In view of the undertaking tendered by
respondent no.05 - institution, permission was
accorded to put shutters on the shops in question and
the institution was permitted to use the shopping
complex for academic purpose. Liberty was als
granted to the Municipal Council or the Town Planning
authorities to take action in accordance with law, if
it is noticed that the construction contravenes any
of the building regulations or any other statutory
provisions.

¶29

03.Respondent no.05 - institution presented

¶30

(Judgment) (4) W.P. No. 05126 of 2001

¶31

Writ Petition No. 06717 of 2015 seeking relief in
respect of the commercial complex raised by the
institution. After presentation of the petition, a
communication was received by respondent no.05 herein
from Town Planner of Latur Municipal Corporation
(previously Municipal Council) in respect of
permissibility of use of 15 % of the open space and
in view of the said communication, said writ petition
came to be disposed of.

¶32

04.Learned Counsel appearing for respondent
no.05 - institution states that since the development
plan for Latur Municipal Corporation has been
approved by the State Government, it is permissible
to put to use 15 % of the area for commercial
purpose. The learned Counsel submits that there is
no contravention of any regulation or statutory
provision and the construction raised by respondent
no.05 - Educational Society for commercial purpose
can be retained.

¶33

05.In view of the developments referred to
above, occurred during pendency of the petition, the
instant petition can be disposed of by keeping option
of the planning authority and the Town Planning
Department open to take appropriate steps as
permissible in law, in the event, any contravention
of any regulations, policy prescribed by the State
Government or statutory provisions is noticed.

¶34

06.With the liberty as aforesaid, the writ

¶35

(Judgment) (5) W.P. No. 05126 of 2001

¶36

petition is disposed of. Rule discharged. There
shall be no order as to costs.

¶37

( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi ) ( R.M. Borde )
JUDGE JUDGE

¶38

...........

¶39

puranik / WP5126.01

Raghunath Waghoji Bansode v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghunath Waghoji Bansode v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Qureshi Manzoor Fakir Mohammad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Pawan Babarao Ingle and Another Vs the Chief Security Commissioner Railway Protection Force South Central Railway Secunderabad and Anr.

Ankur Ganeshrao Rajurkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Abdul Gani Khairulla Choudhari Vs Raghunath Waghoji Bansode and Ors.

Dayanand Education Society through Its Secretary Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Madhukar Sukadeo Nirmal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others