ABHIJIT VILAS PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. THE SECRETARY DEPT. OF CULTURAL AFFAIRS AND ORS.

                                                          51 PIL-39-2026(C).doc


               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

               PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 39 OF 2026

Abhijit Vilas Patil.                                ...Petitioner.
         Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others.                ...Respondents.
                            ——————
Mr. Niranjan D. Tiwari for the Petitioner.
Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for the Respondent-State.
                                 ——————
                                   Coram :     Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
                                               Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
                                   Date      : September 8, 2026.
P. C. :

1.         By the present PIL petition, the Petitioner seeks a writ of

mandamus directing the Respondents to produce before this Court the

entire original record pertaining to the conservation and restoration

work being undertaken at Shree Karveer Nivasini Shree Mahalaxmi

(Ambabai) Temple [for short “Mahalaxmi Temple”] including the

administrative approvals, work order, drawings, plans, inspection

reports etc and for appointment of high level expert committee

consisting of eminent conservation architects, archaeologists, structural

engineers and heritage experts to examine the work already

undertaken.

2.         Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner would submit that

as per the work order dated 12th December 2025, while carrying out the


Patil-SR                            1 of 5
                                                        51 PIL-39-2026(C).doc


work of conservation, use of machines is prohibited. He would submit

that there is violation of the said condition. Upon a query by this Court

as to the basis for such apprehension, learned Counsel appearing for the

Petitioner is unable to point out any material on record to demonstrate

the violation of work order.         He would, however, insist that an

independent committee be constituted to visit premises of Mahalaxmi

Temple and examine the details of the work order and the manner in

which the work has been carried out. He would further rely on the

newspaper articles and insist on the appointment of high level

independent committee.

3.         There is no dispute about the fact that Mahalaxmi Temple is one

of the ancient and most revered temples in India. The Respondent

authorities have undertaken the conservation and restoration project

and the work order dated 12 th December 2025 has been issued by the

Assistant Director of Archaeological and Museums, Pune Division, Pune.

Considering the immense historical and archaeological significance

attached to Mahalaxmi Temple, we have no doubt that the conservation

work which is being carried out, will be in accordance with the

prescribed specifications and would be supervised by the Directorate of

Archaeology. There is no material produced on record by the Petitioner

to demonstrate that there are any serious concerns as regards the on-

going conservation work.


Patil-SR                            2 of 5
                                                              51 PIL-39-2026(C).doc


4.         The reliance placed only on the newspaper articles is clearly

misconceived. Unless there is bona fide need for appointment of high

level committee, as sought by the Petitioner, in our view, the PIL is

clearly misconceived. The record indicates that the Petitioner has not

taken any steps to verify through any experts as to whether the work of

conservation would result in any negative impact on the premises of

Mahalaxmi         Temple.    Considering      the   immense     historical    and

archaeological significance of the temple, unless there is cogent

material on record, we are not inclined to appoint any committee. The

appointment of committee cannot be on the basis of whims and fancies

of Petitioner and is required to be backed by sufficient data, which

would highlight the concerns expressed in the petition. Mere reliance

on the newspaper articles without anything more is not sufficient to

substantiate the purported concerns. It is expected that when the PIL

of this nature is filed, the Petitioner is equipped with all data and expert

reports in order to demonstrate that conservation work is not in

consonance with the specifications or is contrary to the work order,

which will have negative impact on the structure.

5.         Upon a query by this Court as to the basis on which the Petitioner

alleges violation of Clause (11) of the work order dated 12 th December

2025, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner is unable to

demonstrate any material on record.


Patil-SR                             3 of 5
                                                        51 PIL-39-2026(C).doc


6.         Learned AGP would submit that the conservation work is being

carried out under the supervision of concerned officers and none of the

structures of Mahalaxmi Temple are touched.

7.         From the record, we also find that irrelevant questionnaire was

addressed by the Petitioner to the District Collector seeking

information as regards the conservation work. The questionnaire would

in fact indicate that the Petitioner is not at all aware about the nature of

conservation work being carried out at Mahalaxmi Temple. The present

petition is based on unfounded apprehensions. It was open for the

Petitioner to seek necessary documents under the RTI Act and be

prepared with necessary data before filing of the present petition. The

questionnaire is by one Hindu Jansangharsh Committee of which the

Petitioner claims to be president. Upon a query by this Court as to why

the said Committee / Association has not filed the present PIL petition,

learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the

Association is not even registered.          The Petition pleads that the

organisation is actively engaged in matters concerning public interest,

protection of religious institutions, heritage preservation and civic

causes. There are no details of social causes espoused by the said

organisation or by the Petitioner. It is evident that the present petition

is publicity aimed petition. The pleadings are extremely vague and do

not bear out any serious concerns about work being carried out.


Patil-SR                            4 of 5
                                                             51 PIL-39-2026(C).doc


Though petition pleads about report dated 24 th July 2026, the report

has not been appended to the petition.

8.         In the light of above, the PIL petition is clearly misconceived and is

dismissed with cost of Rs. 2 lakh, which amount has already been

deposited by the Petitioner in this Court. Let the cost of Rs.2 lakh be

paid to the Respondent No.5, i.e., Shri Mahalakshmi Temple

Management Committee.



 [Neeraj P. Dhote, J.]                           [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]




Patil-SR                              5 of 5