BHAGIRATHI BABURAO WADEKARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS

2026:BHC-AUG:40285

                                                  (1)                      912 WP 12348 OF 2024


                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              912 WRIT PETITION NO. 12348 OF 2024
                                              WITH
                               CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9094 OF 2026
                                        IN WP/12348/2024

                                 BHAGIRATHI BABURAO WADEKAR
                                              VERSUS
            THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS
                                                 ...
           Mr. R. B. Dhakane h/f. Mr. M. R. Andhale, Advocate for the Petitioner
           Mr. B. V. Virdhe, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 – State
           Mr. A. M. Inamdar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 to 7
                                                 …

                                             CORAM       : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
                                             DATE        : 02.09.2026

           PER COURT :-

           CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9094 OF 2026 IN WP/12348/2024

           .            Vide the present Civil Application, prayer is made to allow

           production of certain documents namely the application filed before the Sub

           Divisional Officer at Ambajogai, Dist. Beed and the copy of rent agreement.


           2.           Mr. R. B. Dhakane h/f. Mr. M. R. Andhale, learned Advocate for

           the petitioner submits that these documents are sought to be submitted before

           this Court pursuant to the observation made by this Court in earlier order.


           3.           Mr. A. M. Inamdar, learned Advocate for the respondents would

           fairly offers his no objection to allow the application.
                                       (2)                          912 WP 12348 OF 2024


4.           For the reasons stated in the application, the same stands allowed.


5.           The documents sought to be produced at prayer Clause “B” of the

application are taken on record and shall be read as part of the writ petition.


WRIT PETITION NO. 12348 OF 2024

6.           The peculiar facts of the case are that the petitioner is a 77 years

old widow and issueless lady. During the lifetime of her deceased husband, he

had adopted one Avinash as their son. Respondent No.4 is the widow of

Avinash and respondent Nos.5 to 7 are the children of Avinash. Respondent

Nos.4 to 7 were residing at Pune on account of their job. During the period of

Covid-19, they left Pune and came to Ambajogai. After their arrival at

Ambajogai, respondent No.4 is reported to have joined service as a Nurse at

Lokhandi Savargaon. Against this backdrop, differences cropped up between

the petitioner and her adopted daughter-in-law which gave rise to proceedings

under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior

Citizens Act 2007 filed by the petitioner. The said application was partly

allowed and instead of directing respondent Nos.4 to 7 to vacate the

residential house owned by the petitioner, the first authority divided a portion

of the said property for the residence of the respective parties.


7.           Feeling dissatisfied with the said order, the petitioner approached

the competent authority i.e. respondent No.3. However, without considering
                                        (3)                        912 WP 12348 OF 2024


the merits of the matter, the competent authority merely remanded the matter

back to the first authority. Again, the first authority passed almost the same

order except by giving a description of the area that should be shared by the

respective parties. As against this, the petitioner is before this Court.


8.           It is reported that on issuance of notice, nobody appeared for the

respondents and hence Mr. A. M. Inamdar, learned Advocate is engaged by this

Court to represent respondent Nos.4 to 7. An affidavit-in-reply is filed under

the signature of one Ganesh Jidge who happened to be Naib Tahsildar

Ambajogai. Surprisingly this deponent for no reasons has challenged the

merits of the petitioner’s application by pointing out her financial ability and

also alleging discrepancies in the application and the writ petition. Such stand

taken by the government authority is contrary to the practice and experience.


9.           May it be, considering the controversy, some points are evident :

(i) the subject matter house is a self-earned property of the petitioner (ii) the

said property was never transferred by the petitioner to respondent Nos.4 to 7

out of the relationship and particularly on the backdrop of the death of

Avinash, the petitioner allowed respondent Nos.4 to 7 to reside with her.

While the Act of 2007 provides balance of convenience in favour of the

applicant like the petitioner, the authorities have divided the said property

between the parties.
                                       (4)                        912 WP 12348 OF 2024


10.          Today when the matter was called, Mr. R. B. Dhakane h/f. Mr. M.

R. Andhale, learned Advocate would fairly submit that she is even ready to

settle the matter with her daughter-in-law. It is pointed out that respondent

No.4 herself is an earning member while the petitioner is also residing a

meagre pension. She would submit that respondent No.4 is even not allowing

the petitioner to enter in her own house, and she is constrained to stay at

some other place, that too on rent basis.


11.          In view of this, I deem it appropriate to issue notice to respondent

Nos.4 to 7 for final disposal of the writ petition. However, in the peculiar facts

of the case, the Court notice be served through the concerned Police Station.


12.          Notice is made returnable on 30.09.2026.


13.          The respondent Nos.4 to 7 are directed to remain present before

this Court on the next date.




                                                    [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]
PRW