Anand Ramji Kirtane v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC1 Dec 2025WP/10358/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Encroachment removal from cremation/burial ground land (Gut Nos. 239-241, Jawala Bazar, Aundhanagnath, Hingoli); enforcement/compliance of earlier Bombay High Court order dated 12.01.2016 in WP 3320/2001; laches and unreasonable delay in approaching writ court; bona fide deposit condition of Rs.5 lakhs; contempt angle regarding deceased original petitioner; interim adjournment to 08.01.2026.

What did the court decide?

Interim conditional direction: the issue raised will be considered only upon the petitioner depositing Rs.5 lakhs within one month to show bona fides; the matter is placed for further consideration on 8th January 2026. No final relief granted at this stage. ¶¶16

Anand Ramji Kirtane vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents can be directed to remove all unauthorized encroachments, including permanent structures, from lands bearing Gut No. 239, 240 and 241 at village Jawala Bazar, Tq. Aundhanagnath, Dist. Hingoli, and restore the said lands for the designated purpose of cremation and burial. +1 more

¶¶10

Court's answer

The issue raised in the petition can be considered only upon deposit of Rs.5 lakhs by the petitioner to show his bona fides, such deposit to be made within a period of one month.

¶¶13

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner has not approached the appropriate authority as well as this Court within a reasonable time, having come only in 2025 despite a representation made in 2018.

¶¶13

Key takeaways

In the earlier Writ Petition No. 3320 of 2001 no specific direction was given by this Court; the grievance therein was taken to have been redressed to a larger extent on the basis of the affidavit filed by the Tahasildar, and a person asserting an independent cause ought to have come before this Court on his own motion.obiter¶¶13
The petitioner failed to file the death certificate of Mr. Prabhakar Babulal Porwal, who could have been the best person to file the contempt petition.obiter¶¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (Division Bench) — Writ Petition No. 10358 of 2025, decided 01.12.2025. Petitioner sought directions to remove unauthorised encroachments, including permanent structures, from Gut Nos. 239, 240 and 241 at village Jawala Bazar, Tq. Aundhanagnath, Dist. Hingoli, and to restore the lands for cremation and burial, and compliance of the order dated 12.01.2016 in Writ Petition No. 3320 of 2001. The Court noted that (i) no specific direction had been given in the 2016 order, the grievance there having been treated as redressed on the Tahasildar's affidavit; (ii) the original petitioner in that petition, Mr. Prabhakar Babulal Porwal, reportedly died in 2020 and no death certificate was filed; and (iii) despite a representation dated 23.07.2018 alleging around 157 encroachments, the petitioner approached the Court only on 21.07.2025, i.e., not within reasonable time. Conditionally entertaining the matter, the Court directed the petitioner to deposit Rs.5,00,000/- within one month to demonstrate bona fides, failing which the issue would not be considered, and posted the matter for further consideration on 08.01.2026.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶2

9 WRIT PETITION NO. 10358 OF 2025

¶3

ANAND RAMJI KIRTANE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶4

Mr. P. S. Shinde, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for the Respondent/State

¶5

CORAM: SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.

¶6

DATE : 1^st DECEMBER, 2025

¶7

P. C. :-

¶8

Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner.

¶9

2. The Petitioner seeks directions against the Respondents

¶10

to remove all unauthorized encroachments including permanent structures from the lands bearing Gut No. 239, 240 and 241 at village Jawala Bazar, Tq. Aundhanagnath, Dist. Hingoli and to restore the said lands for the designated purpose of cremation and burial. He also seeks compliance of the order passed by this Court dated 12.01.2016 in Writ Petition No. 3320 of 2001. Learned Advocate for the petitioner relies on the order dated 12.01.2016 passed by this Court, however, submits that the said petition was

¶11

1 of 3

¶12

9 WP 10358.2025.odt

¶13

filed by another person and according to him, the said Petitioner has expired in 2020. First of all, the Petitioner has not filed the death certificate of Mr. Prabhakar Babulal Porwal, who could have been the best person to file the contempt petition. Taking into consideration the order that was passed by this Court on 12.01.2016, it appears that no specific direction was given by this Court in the said Writ Petition, but on the basis of affidavit filed by the Tahasildar it was taken that the grievance of the Petitioner to a larger extent has been redressed. If the Petitioner has any independent cause then he ought to have come before this Court. He has produced on record the representation dated 23.07.2018 filed by him for the removal of encroachment by giving reference to the order passed by this Court, still he has not produced this Court immediately. He is approaching this Court on 21.07.2025. Now he says that around 157 encroachments have been made. He has not approached the appropriate authority as well as this Court within a reasonable time. However, taking into consideration the issue raised that can be considered only upon deposit of amount of Rs.5 lakhs to be deposited by the Petitioner to show his bonafides. Petitioner to deposit the said amount within a period of one month.

¶14

2 of 3

¶15

9 WP 10358.2025.odt

¶16