Dismissed

Shri. Shrirang Baburao Watkar v. the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Dec 2021WP/8469/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought directions for demolishing unauthorized structures on his private property. The Court observed that the Respondent Corporation would proceed with demolition as per its turn and the priorities set in a previous PIL. Consequently, the Court declined to issue further directions, directing the petitioner to initiate his own proceedings against the relatives

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to proceed against relatives in accordance with law; Writ Petition disposed of.

Shri. Shrirang Baburao Watkar Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

1 34-WP 8469-19.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.8469 OF 2019

¶4

Shrirang Baburao Watkar… Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal
Secretary & Ors.… Respondents

¶5

Mr. Vaibhav Ugle for the Petitioner.
R.A. Salunkhe, AGP for the State.
Mr. Deepak R. More a/w Mr. Shivram A. Gawade for Respondent No.2.

¶6

CORAM :A.A. SAYED &
ABHAY AHUJA, JJ.

¶7

DATE :6TH DECEMBER 2021

¶8

P.C.:

¶9

1. This Petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking

¶10

directions against Respondent No.2-Corporation to take action to demolish
unauthorised constructions made by Respondents No.3 to 5 pursuant to
Notice dated 24th April, 2017 of the Respondent No.2-Corporation.

¶11

2. In the Affidavit-in-Reply filed by the Respondent-Corporation,

¶12

it is stated that the Respondent-Corporation would remove the

¶13

1 of 3

¶14

Mugdha

¶15

2 34-WP 8469-19.odt

¶16

unauthorised constructions raised by Respondents No.3 to 5 as per its
turn. The learned Counsel for Respondent-Corporation has pointed out
copy of the Affidavit filed by the Respondent-Corporation dated 10th
December, 2015 in PIL No.207 of 2010 (Mrs. Jayashree Suresh Dange Vs.
The Member Secretary, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, Mumbai &
Anr.), wherein in compliance of the order dated 28th October, 2015 passed
in the PIL, the priorities for action of demolition have been set out in
paragraph 3.

¶17

3.It is an admitted position that the alleged unauthorised
constructions are on the private property of the Petitioner and the
Respondents No.3 and 4 are the nephew of the Petitioner and Respondent
No.5 is the brother in law of Respondents No.3 and 4.

¶18

4.Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and
the averments made in the Affidavit-in-Reply by the Respondent-
Corporation, we are not inclined to issue any directions in the Petition. We
accept the statement of the Respondent-Corporation that the illegal/
unauthorised constructions shall be proceeded against as per its turn.

¶19

2 of 3

¶20

Mugdha

¶21

3 34-WP 8469-19.odt

¶22

5. In the meanwhile, since the illegal and unauthorised

¶23

structures are in the private property of the Petitioner, it is expected of the
Petitioner to adopt his own proceedings against the Respondents No.3 to 5
in accordance with the law.

¶24

6. The Writ Petition to stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶25

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

¶26

 (A.A. SAYED, J.)

¶27

Digitally signed by MUGDHA MUGDHA M M PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2021.12.07 11:18:23 +0530

¶28

3 of 3

¶29

Mugdha

Shri. Shrirang Baburao Watkar v. the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Shrirang Baburao Watkar v. the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nanddeepak Dayal Patade Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Government Pleader and Ors.

Shree Siddheshwar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Maryadit Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shree Siddheshwar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Maryadit Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.