Bombay High Court

SANTOSH LAXMAN SHARMA AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE DEPT AND ORS

Decided: 1 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The petition is disposed, permitting withdrawal and directing the petitioners to seek resolution of remaining grievances through the corporation, with Supreme Court‑finalized grievances remaining barred from reopening.

Summary

Santosh Laxman Sharma and others filed a writ petition challenging grievances against the State of Maharashtra and developers. The petitioners, through counsel, sought to withdraw the petition while preserving the right to raise remaining grievances before the corporation. The court noted that the parties could achieve an amicable settlement through mutual negotiations with the developers. It also observed that grievances already decided by the Supreme Court could not be reopened. Consequently, the court disposed of the petition, allowing the petitioners to approach the corporation on the remaining issues.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate procedure for withdrawing a writ petition while retaining the right to pursue unresolved grievances?
Can grievances already adjudicated by the Supreme Court be reopened in the present proceedings?

Subjects

writ petition
withdrawal
amicable settlement
grievance
Supreme Court finality
civil appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

          Digitally
          signed by                                                  54-WP-12429-2024.doc
          RUPALI
RUPALI    RAJESH
RAJESH    WAKODIKAR
WAKODIKAR Date:
          2026.09.03
          15:36:45        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
          +0530

                                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                WRIT PETITION NO. 12429 OF 2024


                 Santosh Laxman Sharma & Ors.                ...Petitioners
                      Versus
                 The State of Maharashtra Thr. The Dept & Ors....Respondents


                 Mr. Kishor Patil i/b Mr. Akshay Kapadia for the Petitioners.

                 Mr. A.I.Patel, Addl.G.P a/w Smt.V.R.Raje, A.G.P for the Respondent-
                 State.

                 Mr. Aniruddha Garge a/w Mr. Yesh Gangal i/b Kashyap Bhalerao for
                 the Respondent Nos.5 to 8.

                                            CORAM : M. S. KARNIK &
                                                    SANDESH D. PATIL JJ.
                                            DATE : 1st SEPTEMBER, 2026



                 P.C. :


                 1.           Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners.



                 2.           Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that he has

                 instructions to withdraw this petition with the liberty to approach the



  Wakodikar                                                                           1/3
                                                                 54-WP-12429-2024.doc


            Corporation placing on record the grievances that remain, in view of

            the subsequent development. Learned Counsel for the petitioners

            submits that he is also willing to negotiate the matter with the

            respondent Nos.5 to 8 – developers. The approach of the petitioners

            appears to be reasonable, though Mr. Garge raised an objection that

            most of the occupants have settled their disputes with the developers

            and it is the petitioners who are agitating/contesting their

            grievances.



            3.            Considering the stand taken by the petitioners, we have

            no matter of doubt that amicable resolution can be worked out

            between the petitioners and the developers by mutual negotiations.



            4.            It is open for the petitioners to approach the Corporation

            for the remaining grievances.          Such representation shall be

            considered on its own merits in accordance with law after hearing

            them.




Wakodikar                                                                         2/3
                                                                 54-WP-12429-2024.doc


            5.         Needless to mention that the grievances which have

            attained finality up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as submitted by

            Mr. Garge, shall obviously not be reopened.



            6.         Petition is accordingly disposed of.




            (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)                            (M. S. KARNIK, J.)




Wakodikar                                                                          3/3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…