Mukund Vaman Patankar v. Islampur Municipal Council Thr Chief Officer and Ors.

Bombay HC4 Oct 2024WP/13322/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought protection against imminent demolition of his residential-cum-commercial structure by Islampur Municipal Council and PWD without notices or due process. The Court issued notice to the Council, returnable 4 October 2024, restrained demolition until then, required petitioner to maintain status quo and file affidavit of service.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mukund Vaman Patankar vs Islampur Municipal… — Municipal and Town Planning | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

504-ASWP-13322-2024.DOC

¶2

Ashwini

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 13322 OF 2024

¶5

Mukund Vaman Patankar …Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Islampur Municipal Council through Chief ...Respondents Officer & Ors

¶8

Mr Kishor Patil , with Arjun Pawar, i/b Shrikant D Patil, for the Petitioner.

¶9

Ms Rupali Shinde, AGP , for Respondents Nos. 2 to 5-State.

¶10

Digitally signed by ASHWINI H ASHWINI GAJAKOSH H GAJAKOSH Date:2024.09.24 16:35:32 +0530

¶11

PC:-

¶12

CORAM: M.S. Sonak & Kamal Khata, JJ DATED: 24th September 2024

¶13

Heard Mr Patil for the Petitioner. Mr Patil states that a notice of today’s hearing has been served upon the Islampur Municipal Council (“IMC”) and Public Works Department (“PWD”).

¶14

Ms Shinde, learned AGP appears for PWD but there is no appearance on behalf of Council.

¶15

Mr Patil contends that the Council and PWD without following the due process of law are on the verge of demolishing a portion of Petitioner’s residential use and commercial unit. He states that no notices have been issued by any of the authorities

¶16

Page 1 of 2

¶17

504-ASWP-13322-2024.DOC

¶18

and neither have any measurements being taken. On instructions, Mr Patil states that the Petitioner do not oppose any road widening or even partial demolition provided, that the Petitioner is adequately compensated in terms of the law.

¶19

He, however, submits that such demolitions without following the due process of law are not to be allowed. Once again, we issue Court’s notice to Islampur Municipal Council, returnable on 4th October 2024. Until the next date, the Respondents are restrained from demolishing any portion of the Petitioner’s residential and commercial structure.

¶20

At the same time, the Petitioner should also maintain the status quo at the site. Petitioner will have to take immediate steps to serve this order and notice on the Islampur Municipal Council and file an Affidavit of Service.

¶21

The learned AGP is also requested to obtain instructions and apprise the Court on the status of demolitions on the next date.

¶22

All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶23

(Kamal Khata, J)

¶24

(M.S. Sonak, J)

¶25

Page 2 of 2

Mukund Vaman Patankar v. Islampur Municipal Council Thr Chief Officer and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mukund Vaman Patankar v. Islampur Municipal Council Thr Chief Officer and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Gramastha Mandal Kundevahal Thr Panchpudhari Sharad Bama Bhoir and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bhau Nana Kadam (Since Deceas through His Legal Heirs ) vs the Deputy Collector Spl Land and Ors.

Shri Narayanrao Madhavrao Tekawade Since Decd. Thr Lrs vs State of Maharashtra through the Under Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept. and Ors.

Devji Ganu Shelar Since Deceased Throu. L.H vs the Addl Collector and Ors.

Vijayabai Yalladas Gaddam vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Anand Jaykumar Upasani vs Income Tax Officer, Ito Ward, 2(1) Nashik Income Tax Dep. and Ors.