Bombay High Court
CHANDRAKANT SHANKAR ATNURE ALIAS CHANDRAKANTversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE MINISTRY OF REVENUE AND FOREST DEPARTMENT
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court ordered the Slum Rehabilitation Authority to decide the petitioners' representation on eligibility within eight weeks and to communicate the decision within two weeks.
Summary
The petitioners, Chandrakant Shankar Atnure and others, filed a writ petition seeking a directive to the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (S.R.A.) to decide their representation concerning eligibility under Annexure‑II of the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme. They alleged that the S.R.A. had not yet ruled on their application for rehabilitation. The High Court examined whether it could issue a mandamus directing the S.R.A. to make a decision. The Court held that it could order the authority to decide the representation within a specified time‑frame. Accordingly, the Court directed the S.R.A. to decide the representation within eight weeks and to communicate the decision to the petitioners within two weeks thereafter. With this direction, the petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a mandamus directing the Slum Rehabilitation Authority to decide a representation on eligibility under Annexure‑II of the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme
Subjects
- Slum Rehabilitation
- Eligibility
- Mandamus
- Writ Petition
- Slum Rehabilitation Authority
- Annexure‑II
Judgment
40. WP 1013 of 2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1013 OF 2025
Chandrakant Shankar Atnure & Ors. … Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Through the Ministry of Revenue
And Forest Department & Ors. … Respondent
…..
Mr. Sunil Kumar i/b M/s Kumar & Associates for the Petitioners.
Smt. Anjali Helekar, G.P. a/w Smt. Gauri Sawant, A.G.P. for
Respondent No.1-State.
Adv. Nishigandh Patil a/w Adv. Saraswati Gupta for Respondent
Nos.2 and 3.
…..
CORAM: M.S. KARNIK &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATED : 16th SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. It is the case of the Petitioners that the representation which is
made by the Petitioners to the Respondent-S.R.A, which is at page
no.285 of the Petition be decided. By the said representation, the
Petitioners wanted the S.R.A. Authority to decide the eligibility under
the Annexure-II for rehabilitation under the Slum Rehabilitation
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 1/2
40. WP 1013 of 2025.doc
Scheme.
3. This is the only relief sought by the Petitioners, we direct the
Respondent-S.R.A. to decide the said representation, which is made
by the Petitioners to the Respondent-S.R.A., which is Exhibit ‘V’ at
page 285 of the Petition. The said representation to be decided
within eight weeks from the date of communication of this Order. In
case the said representation is decided, then a copy of the decision to
be communicated to the Petitioners within two weeks thereafter, to
enable the Petitioners to take appropriate steps in accordance with
law.
4. In the light of this, nothing survives for further consideration.
The Petition sands of disposed of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M.S. KARNIK, J.)
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 2/2
Digitally signed
by RAJESH
RAJESH VASANT
VASANT CHITTEWAN
CHITTEWAN Date:
2026.09.17
13:42:42 +0530
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.