Bombay High Court

FINEEDGE AGGREGATES LLP AND ORSversusTHE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PUNE AND ORS

Decided: 9 October 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The court held that the impugned order must be set aside and the matter remitted to the Collector for fresh consideration.

Summary

The petitioners, Fineedge Aggregates LLP and others, challenged an order restricting their use of a road, alleging it endangered villagers due to heavy vehicle traffic and lacked an alternative route. The District Collector’s affidavit confirmed the road’s heavy usage and safety concerns. The petitioners offered to construct the road suomoto if permitted. After hearing, the parties agreed that the impugned order should be quashed and the matter remitted to the Collector for fresh consideration. The court granted the intervenor liberty to assist but not to become a party, set aside the order, and directed the Collector to hear all affected parties and decide within four weeks. Consequently, the writ petition and the related interim application were disposed.

Issues considered

Whether the order restricting the petitioners' use of the road should be quashed.
Whether the matter should be remitted to the District Collector for fresh adjudication.
Whether the intervenor can be made a party to the proceedings.

Subjects

road usage
public road
heavy vehicles
safety
writ petition
quashing order
remand
District Collector
intervenor
public interest

Judgment

Gitalaxmi                                            902-WP-12797-2026+.docx



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                    WRIT PETITION NO. 12797 OF 2026

FINEEDGE AGGREGATES LLP AND OTHERS                    ...PETITIONERS

                        Versus

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PUNE
AND OTHERS                                            ...RESPONDENTS

                                WITH
            INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO. 29444 OF 2026
                                 IN
                   WRIT PETITION NO. 12797 OF 2026

   Mr. Girish Godbole, Senior Counsel a/w Mr. Chetan R. Nagare,
   Mr. Dhananjay Kate & Mr. Prasad Avhad, learned counsel for
   the Petitioners.

   Mr. Jitendra Tagtap, learned counsel for Respondent No. 3-
   MPCB.

   D. V. Sutar a/w Ms. Anjali B. Shaw, learned counsel for
   Respondent No. 6.

   Mr. Ganesh Talekar, Nayab Tahsildar, Maval is present in the
   Court.

   Mr. Appa Laxman Banvase, Village Development Officer,
   Respondent No. 6 is present in the Court.

   Ms. Mamta S. Srivastava, learned AGP for the State-
   Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 & 7.
                                      Page 1 of 3
                                 9th OCTOBER, 2026
Gitalaxmi                                          902-WP-12797-2026+.docx




                               CORAM      : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

                               DATE       : 9th OCTOBER, 2026.

Per Court :
1.          Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, more
particularly the Village Panchayat, Respondent No. 6, so also the
Intervenor, Petitioners and the learned AGP for the State.           Also
perused the Affidavit filed by the District Collector dated 8 th October,
2026. The Affidavit of District Collector indicates usage of road by
others and that there is no alternate road for usage by the
Petitioners. The District Collector’s Affidavit also indicates that the
safety of villagers is at risk, in view of the usage of road through the
densely populated area by the heavy vehicles particularly during
crowded times.

2.          Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that
the Petitioners are willing to make construction of the road suo
moto, if the Collector/authorities so permits.

3.          Having considered the Affidavit filed by the District
Collector, the parties have agreed before this Court that it is more
appropriate that the impugned order be quashed and set aside and
the matter be remitted back to the Collector to decide it afresh.




                                   Page 2 of 3
                              9th OCTOBER, 2026
Gitalaxmi                                                  902-WP-12797-2026+.docx



4.              The Intervenor is granted liberty to assist in the matter by
placing any material or make submissions before the Collector.
However, the Intervenor is not permitted to be made a party to the
proceedings.

5.              In the result, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is
remitted back to the Collector. The Collector to pass appropriate
orders by hearing all the affected parties. The Collector to decide the
same in accordance with law within a period of four weeks.

6.              Parties to appear before the Collector on 15 th October, 2026
at 3:00 p.m. so as to enable the Collector to fix schedule in the
matter as per his convenience.

7.              With these observations, Writ Petition stands disposed of
accordingly.

8.              In view of disposal of the Writ Petition, Interim Application
does not survive, hence the same also stands disposed of.

                                                    [ ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ]


                    Digitally signed
                    by GITALAXMI
        GITALAXMI   KRISHNA
        KRISHNA     KOTAWADEKAR
        KOTAWADEKAR Date:
                    2026.10.09
                    20:04:01 +0530




                                            Page 3 of 3
                                       9th OCTOBER, 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.