Disposed

Shri. Sunil Mankar v. Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation through Its Manager and Anr.

Bombay HC8 Jun 2022WP/6694/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge Court disposed of writ petition challenging notice under Section 55 of the MRTP Act. Allowed regularization application to be filed within two weeks, directed expedited disposal by respondent, and stayed coercive steps until decision communication.

What did the court decide?

Regularization application to be filed within two weeks; no coercive steps taken until decision communicated.

Shri. Sunil Mankar Vs Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal… — Municipal and Town Planning | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

1/2

¶2

501.wp.6694.2022.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 6694 OF 2022

Shri Sunil Mankar

…Petitioner

Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation & Anr …Respondents

¶9

Mr. Sagar Kursija for the Petitioner.

¶10

Mr. Deepak More a/w. Mr. Shivram A. Gawade for the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2.

¶11

CORAM : A. A. SAYED & ABHAY AHUJA, JJ DATED : 8^th JUNE 2022

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

The Petition is filed challenging the Notices dated 03.06.2022 issued by the Respondent-Corporation under section 55 of the MRTP Act.

¶14

Learned Counsel for the Respondent-Corporation states that the subject structure is within the blue line under DC Regulations. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, however, states that there is no mention in the notice that the subject structure is falling within the blue line.

¶15

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, states

¶16

that the Petitioner is in the process of filing Regularization Application online and the same shall be filed within two weeks

1/2

AKN

2/2

501.wp.6694.2022.doc

from today.

In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, we dispose of the Petition by passing the following order:

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

(i) We record the statement of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Regularization Application shall be filed online by the Petitioner within two weeks from today;

¶25

(ii) If such Regularization Application is filed, the same shall be disposed of by the Respondent-Corporation expeditiously and the decision on the same shall be communicated to the Petitioner.

¶26

(iii) Until the Regularization Application is decided and for a period of two weeks from the date of communication of the decision to the Petitioner on the Regularization Application, no coercive steps shall be taken against the structure of the Petitioner.

¶27

The Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

¶28

ANANT Digitally signedby ANANTKRISHNA NAIK KRISHNANAIK Date:2022.06.0818:51:18+0530

¶29

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

¶30

(A. A. SA\YED, J.)

¶31

2/2

¶32

AKN

Shri. Sunil Mankar v. Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation through Its Manager and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Sunil Mankar v. Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation through Its Manager and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Shripati Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary and Ors.

Mahesh Govind Mehra Vs Gangaram Gangaram Kokkula and 15 Ors.

Atc Telecom Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Mr. Sameer Vijay Bhujbal Vs the Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Polyrub Extrusion Pvt. Ltd. Thr Chandrashekhar D Rane Vs Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and Anr.

Kanhu Krishna Sandbhor Vs State of Maharashtra Thr Government Pleader and Ors.