Supriya Sudhir Parab v. M.M.R.D.A.

Bombay HC4 Aug 2025WP/4668/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court writ petition (WP 4668 of 2024) by Supriya Sudhir Parab against MMRDA, MHADA and others concerning Room No. 501, Swapnapurti Society, New Tilak Nagar, Chembur, Mumbai-400 089; challenged letter dated 18.01.2024, possession taken 09.02.2024, orders dated 29.08.2024 and 04.11.2024, and handover of possession to Respondent No.5 on 02.01.2025; Article 226 Constitution of India; petition withdrawn with liberty to file civil suit; contentions kept open; no costs; decided 15 September 2025 by G. S. Kulkarni and Aarti Sathe, JJ.; no merits decided.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to pursue a civil suit; no costs; all contentions expressly kept open. ¶¶19

Supriya Sudhir Parab vs M.M.R.D.A. — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

PRAJAKTA SAGAR VARTAK Digitally signed byPRAJAKTA SAGARVARTAK Date: 2025.09.1709:39:32 +0530

¶2

25-WP 4668-24.DOC

¶3

Prajakta Vartak

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 4668 OF 2024

¶6

Supriya Sudhir Parab ...Petitioner Vs M.M.R.D.A. & Ors. ...Respondents

¶7

Mr. Avinash Fatangare i/b. Mr. Sandesh Kate for Petitioner. Mr. Akshay Shinde for Respondent No.1/MMRDA. Mr. Satyajeet Dighe for Respondent Nos.2 & 3/MHADA. Ms. Olive D’Souza for Respondent No.5.

¶8

CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ. DATE: 15 SEPTEMBER 2025.

¶9

P.C.

¶10

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed

¶11

praying for the following reliefs:-

¶12

“a. That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction or a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ calling the entire record and proceedings in respect of the impugned letter dated 18.01.2024 and action of taking possession on 09.02.2024 and after going through its legality, validity and propriety thereof this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the same.

¶13

a-1 That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ, order or direction or a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ calling the entire record and proceedings in respect of the impugned order dated 29.08.2024 passed by the Respondent No.6 and impugned order dated 04.11.2024 passed by the Respondent No.2 and further action of Respondent No.3 to hand over the possession to the Respondent No.5 on 02.01.2025 and after going through its legality, validity and propriety thereof this Hon’ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the same.

¶14

b. That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue the Writ, order or direction or a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing Respondent No.2 and Respondent No.4 to restore the possession in respect of Room No. 501, Swapnapurti Society, New Tilak Nagar, Chembur, Mumbai-400 089 to the Petitioner.”

¶15

Page 1 of 2 15 September 2025

¶16

25-WP 4668-24.DOC

¶17

After this petition was heard for some time, Mr. Fatangare, learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw this petition with liberty to the petitioner to pursue a civil suit.

¶18

Allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as prayed for.

¶19

Disposed of as withdrawn. No costs.

¶20

All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open.

¶21

(AARTI SATHE, J.)

¶22

(G. S. KULKARNI, J.)

¶23

Page 2 of 2 15 September 2025

Supriya Sudhir Parab v. M.M.R.D.A.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Supriya Sudhir Parab v. M.M.R.D.A.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Tanaji Dnyaneshwar Nimbalkar vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Principal Secretary Revenue and Forest Department

Pralhad Dyaneshwar Deshmukh and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra Thr the Principal Secretary Urban Development and Ors.

Akshay Rajendra Dhamdhere vs the State of Maharashtra through G.P. and Ors.

Captain Vilas Waman Katre vs Additional Commissioner of Income Tax Central Range 7

Hemant Ramrao Bhojane vs Maharashtra State Government through Additional Chief Secretary Housing Department and Ors.

Chandu Mathur Waghela vs Chief Executive Officer Slum Rehabilitation Authority