Mahendra Gopal Patil and Another vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Mahendra Gopal Patil and Another vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respondent no.1 (the State of Maharashtra) directed to decide the application filed by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order; writ petition otherwise disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the District Collector, Jalgaon should be directed to decide the petitioner's representation/application dated 12.07.2025, apparently lodged under Section 53 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 following the Grampanchayat's failure to act under Section 53(2), with Section 53(2A) permitting the Collector, suo motu or on an application, to take action.

Court's answer

Taking into consideration the facts stated in the application dated 12.07.2025, the Collector would be the appropriate authority: the application appears to have been made under Section 53 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 upon the Grampanchayat's failure to decide it under sub-section (2), and sub-section (2A) provides that on such failure the Collector, suo motu or on an application made in that behalf, may take action.

Ratio / Principle

In view of the AGP's undertaking that respondent no.1 would decide the petitioner's application within eight weeks, the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing respondent no.1 to decide the application filed by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench), Writ Petition No. 2479 of 2026, decided 23 April 2026 (Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi & Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ.) - Mahendra Gopal Patil & Anr. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. Petitioners sought a direction to the District Collector, Jalgaon to decide their representation dated 12.07.2025; they had applied to the Tahsildar for copies of the N.A. permission and were informed that no record of the N.A. order existed with the concerned office, only the N.A. map. Taking the facts of the 12.07.2025 application into account, the Court found the Collector to be the appropriate authority: the application appeared to have been made under Section 53 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 when the Grampanchayat failed to decide it under sub-section (2) of Section 53, and sub-section (2A) provides that in such circumstances the Collector, suo motu or on an application made in this behalf, may take action. Upon the learned AGP's undertaking, on instructions, that respondent no.1 (the State) would decide the application, the Court disposed of the writ petition by directing respondent no.1 to decide the petitioner's application within a period of eight weeks from the date of the order. No precedent cases were cited and no monetary amounts featured.

2026:BHC-AUG:18326-DB

9-sr909-WP.2479.2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 2479 OF 2026

Mahendra Gopal Patil

Rajendra Prakash Patil ..Petitioners

Vs.

The State of Maharashtra,

The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon,

Kerhale Village Panchayat, Through its Gram Sevak, Tq. Raver, Dist. Jalgaon

Dagadu Hiraji Patil, Age : 75 Years, Occ. Agri., r/o. Kerhale (Bk), Tq. Raver, Dist. Jalgaon ..Respondents

Mr.D.A.Mane, Advocate for petitioners Ms.Neha B. Kamble, AGP for respondent no.1

CORAM : SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI & AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ. DATE : APRIL 23, 2026

ORDER :-

Present petition has been filed with the following relief :-

“B. The Writ Petition may kindly be allowed and learned District Collector, Jalgaon, may kindly be directed to decide the representation dated 12.07.2025 submitted by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible.

2 9-sr909-WP.2479

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though he had made an application to the Tahsildar to get the copies of the N.A. permission, he has received the reply that there is no record available with the concerned office in respect of the N.A. order, however, N.A. map is available.

Taking into consideration of the facts stated in the application dated 12.07.2025, the Collector would be the appropriate authority. Further, it can be seen that the said application appears to have been made under Section 53 of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 (“the Act”, for brevity) when there was failure on the part of the Grampanchayat to decide the application under sub-section (2) of Section 53 of the said Act. Sub-section (2A) of Section 53 of the Act prescribes that when Grampanchayat fails to take any action under sub-section (2) of Section 53 of the Act, then Collector suo motu or on an application made in this behalf, may take action.

Learned AGP, upon instructions, submits that the respondent no.1 would decide the application filed by the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from today.

3 9-sr909-WP.2479

In view of the statement made by learned AGP, we dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the respondent no.1 to decide the application filed by the petitioner, within a period of eight weeks from today.

[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]

[ SMT.VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.]

KBP