Disposed

Raakesh Rajendrakumar Agarwaal v. State of Maharashtra Thr Government Pleader and Ors.

Bombay HC16 Mar 2026WP/16939/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner complained of unauthorised constructions in Survey No.35/6, Gokhiware, Vasai without mandatory open spaces, having issued notice to the Municipal Commissioner. The Court directed the petitioner to make a comprehensive representation to the Assistant Commissioner within two weeks; on such representation, respondent No.4 to issue notices and act in accordance with law after hearing partie

What the court decided

AI extract

Raakesh Rajendrakumar Agarwaal vs State of… — Municipal and Town Planning | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

31-wp 16939-24.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 16939 OF 2024 WITH

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION 14924 OF 2024

¶5

Raakesh Rajendrakumar Agarwaal … Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents

¶6

¶7

Mr. Sadashiv Deshmukh, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Kishor Patil, Mr. Amol Mhatre and Ms. Sonal Dabholkar for the Petitioner. Mr. V. G. Badgujar, AGP for the Respondent-State. Ms. Swati Sagvekar for Respondent Nos.2 to 5.

¶8

__________________________ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK AND S. M. MODAK, JJ. DATED : 16th MARCH, 2026.

¶9

P.C. :

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶11

We request Ms. Sagvekar, learned counsel to appear for respondent

¶12

Nos.2 and 3-Vasai-Virar City Municipal Corporation.

¶13

Ms. Sagvekar, learned counsel appears for the respondentCorporation and requests some time.

¶14

Considering the request made by the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation, it may not be necessary for the respondents to file

¶15

a reply. We have heard learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation.

¶16

Mr. Deshmukh, learned Senior Advocate invited our attention to the

¶17

notice dated 11^th September, 2024 addressed on behalf of the petitioner to

¶18

Amk 1/2

¶19

31-wp 16939-24.doc

¶20

the Commissioner and other concerned officers of the Vasai-Virar City Municipal Corporation. The grievance is with regard to the illegal construction in Survey No.35/6 village Gokhiware, Taluka-Vasai, DistrictPalghar. For the reasons stated in the notice, one such reason being that the constructions have been made without leaving the mandatory open spaces for the petitioner’s land and also that there is large scale unauthorised construction going on in the land bearing Survey No.35/6 and in the disputed land bearing Survey No.35/14, action has to be taken against such illegalities. The petitioner to make a comprehensive representation to Assistant Commissioner, Division ‘G’ Ward, Waliv, Vasai (E) within a period of two weeks from today, setting out all the details and particulars regarding the unauthorised constructions and the requirement of mandatory open spaces.

¶21

On the representation so made, if satisfied after briefly hearing the petitioner that there is substance in the allegations made by the petitioner, respondent No.4 to issue appropriate notice to the concerned responsible for the unauthorised constructions and proceed to take action in accordance with law expeditiously and obviously after hearing the parties.

¶22

The Writ Petition as well as Interim Application are disposed of.

¶23

(S. M. MODAK, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

¶24

Amk 2/2

Raakesh Rajendrakumar Agarwaal v. State of Maharashtra Thr Government Pleader and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Raakesh Rajendrakumar Agarwaal v. State of Maharashtra Thr Government Pleader 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

Shaikh Shahid Abdul Latif Dadamiya vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Ethics Infra Development Pvt. Ltd. vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shreekrishna Chaitanya Enterprises vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Citizen Co-Operative Housing Society Limited vs Mumbai Metropolitan Region Developer Authority

Bhavesh Premji Chothani vs Slum Redevelopment Authority Sra and 4 Ors.

Mani Mulji Padaya vs the State of Maharashtra