Bombay High Court

MANSAROVAR CO OP. HSG. SOC. LTD THRU. CHAIRMAN AND ANRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRU. SECRETARY AND ORS

Decided: 27 July 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: G S KULKARNI AARTI A SATHE

Holding

The Court held that payment of the prescribed amount and the repeal of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, eliminate any legal obstacle, and the Municipal Corporation must grant the Occupation Certificate.

Summary

The petitioners, Mansarovar Co‑op. Housing Society Ltd. and another, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking to quash a communication dated 25‑11‑2025 and to compel the issuance of an Occupation Certificate for a building of 3,878 sq.m. The State of Maharashtra contended that the society had failed to apply to the Collector under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, resulting in loss of revenue calculated at 2.5% of the prevailing annual rates. The petitioners offered to deposit the stipulated amount, which they did, paying Rs.9,53,988 to the Government Treasury. The Court held that, having paid the amount and given that the 1976 Act had been repealed in 1999, there was no legal impediment for the Municipal Corporation to grant the Occupation Certificate. Accordingly, the Court directed the issuance of the certificate within two weeks and ordered correction of the revenue record to delete references to the repealed Act. The petition was disposed.

Issues considered

Whether the failure to file an application under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, bars the grant of an Occupation Certificate.
Whether the payment of the prescribed revenue amount cures the alleged default and removes any impediment to the issuance of the Occupation Certificate.
Whether the repeal of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, affects the validity of the State's objection.

Legislation cited

Subjects

Article 226
Writ Petition
Occupation Certificate
Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act
Co‑operative housing redevelopment
Municipal Corporation
Revenue record correction
Government resolution

Judgment

18.DOC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 1077 2026

Mansarovar Co-op. Hsg. Scty. Ltd. & Anr. ...Petitioners
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents

_________
Mr. Bapat, Senior Advocate with Avinash Fatangare, for Petitioners.
Mr. M. P. Thakur, AGP for the State.
Mr. A. S. Rao, for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
Digitally
__________
signed by
PRASHANT
PRASHANT VILAS RANE
VILAS
RANE Date:
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
2026.08.01
17:03:08
+0530
AARTI SATHE, JJ.
DATE: 27 JULY 2026.

P.C.

1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed

praying for the following substantive reliefs:-

“a. That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ, order, direction or a
writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ calling for entire
record and proceedings in respect of the letter/communication dated
25/11/2025 issued by Respondent No.2 and after going through its legality,
validity and propriety be pleased to quash and set aside the same.

b. That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ order, direction or a writ
in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the
Respondent No.3 to grant Occupation Certificate to the building constructed
by the Petitioner No.2 on area admeasuring 3878 sq.mtrs. Situated at Gat
No. 61 Part, City Survey No. 9278, Village Morivali, Ambernath.”

3. On the earlier occasion on 8 July 2026 we have heard the parties and the

following order is passed:

“1. We are not impressed with what has been stated in paragraph 14 of the
reply affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 / State of Shri. Akash
Sureshrao Garud, Assistant Town Planner, Office of District Collector and
Competent Authority, inasmuch as the redevelopment/ construction, has

Page 1 of 3
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane
18.DOC

already been undertaken after the plans were approved by the Municipal
Corporation. It cannot be that, after all this, any construction permission
approval afresh is to be obtained from the State Government. We do not find
that this will be supported by any norms, even considering the repeal of the
Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, and the Section 20
scheme.

2. Be that as it may, in paragraph 15 of the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of
the State Government, the following averments are made:
“15. In the present case, although, it was mandatory for
Manasaroovar Co-operative Housing Society to submit an
application to the Collector and Competent Authority (ULC),
Thane for the redevelopment of the society, the said Manasaroovar
Co-operative Housing Society was not submitted the application to
the Collector and Competent Authority (ULC), Thane. By doing so,
they have caused a loss of Government revenue equivalent to the
amount calculated at the rate of 2.5% of the prevailing Annual
Statement of Rates, as prescribed under the Government Resolution
dated 01/08/2019.”
3. On such contentions of the State Government Mr. Kiran Bapat, learned
Senior Advocate for the petitioners states that the petitioners are ready and
willing to deposit the amount at the rate of 2.5% of the prevailing annual
statement rates, as prescribed under the Government Resolution dated 1
August 2019. Thus, once such amount is paid, in that event the State
Government cannot have any objection for the Municipal Corporation to
grant Occupation Certificate to the petitioners. Accordingly, let such amount
be deposited by the petitioners with the State Government Treasury within
one week from today.
4. The State Treasury now shall accept the challan/deposit of the petition.
5. Ordered accordingly.
6. List the proceedings on 20 July 2026 (HOB).”

4. We are informed that, in pursuance of the aforesaid order, an amount of

Rs.9,53,988/- has been deposited by the petitioner with the Government

Treasury. A copy of the challan is taken on record and marked “X” for

identification.

5. In this view of the matter, in our opinion, there ought not to be any

impediment, in the context of any proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling

and Regulation) Act, 1976, for the Municipal Corporation not to proceed to grant

an occupation certificate, if the petitioner has complied with all the other

conditions for grant of an O.C. as required in law.

Page 2 of 3
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane
18.DOC

6. Let appropriate steps be taken in this regard within a period of two weeks

from today and the Occupation Certificate be issued, if all other compliances have

been made by the petitioner.

7. Needless to observe that, in view of the payment of the aforesaid amount

by the petitioner, the revenue record shall be corrected so as to delete the

reference to the proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act,

1976 and the name of the petitioner is now required to be entered in the revenue

record. This more particularly, as now there is quietus to the ULC issue as also

considering that the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 itself stood

repealed in the year 1999.

8. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

(AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)

Page 3 of 3
27 July 2026
P. V. Rane

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…