PUSHPA VINODKUMAR NAHAR AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS

2026:BHC-AUG:6464-DB


                                                                             922-WP-138-2026.odt


                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD
                                 922 WRIT PETITION NO. 138 OF 2026

                                  Pushpa Vinodkumar Nahar And Others
                                                  VERSUS
                 The State Of Maharashtra Through Urban Development Department And
                                                   Others
                                                     ...
             Mr. D.P. Palodkar, Advocate h/f Mr. S.D. Nimbalkar, Advocate for the Petitioner
             Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondents/State
             Mr. S.B. Bhosale, Advocate for Respondent No. 4 and 5
                                             ….
                                      CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &
                                                    HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.
                                        DATE : 12 FEBRUARY 2026

             ORDER :

             .     Heard learned advocate Mr. D.P. Palodkar holding for learned

             advocate Mr. S.D. Nimbalkar for petitioners and learned advocate

             Mr. S.B. Bhosale, who waives notice for Respondent No. 4 and 5. He

             places on record affidavit in reply.


             2.    The petition has been filed for quashing and setting aside the

             impugned notices dated 29.04.2025 and order dated 29.12.2025 passed

             by Respondent No. 4 and 5. The major contention of the petitioners is

             that they are owners of portions from CTS No. 90, 21 and 22 situated at

             town Wadwani, Dist. Beed. According to Respondent No. 4 and 5 there is

             illegal construction in Gut No. 214 by the present petitioners and

             therefore the impugned notices have been issued.


                                                    [1]
                                                           922-WP-138-2026.odt


3.    We do not want to go into the merits of the case. However, it

appears that though the present petitioners were not party before this

Court in Writ Petition No. 1113 of 2024, which was decided on

17.02.2016 it appears that it was in respect of unauthorized construction

in Gut No. 214 which vests in the Government. By the said order, this

Court had directed that Collector should make an enquiry and take

decision. Thereafter, it appears that Collector has made enquiry and given

decision that in earlier Survey No. 108A and present Gut No. 214 at

Wadwani the petitioners had filed Writ Petition No. 1113 of 2014 and

their construction cannot be regularized. It also appears that some of the

occupants from Gut No. 214 filed Regular Civil Suit No. 278 of 2023

before Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division Majalgaon and by order dated

12.10.2023 application for interim injunction came to be rejected.

According to the learned advocate for Respondent No. 4 and 5 the said

suit is sill pending. According to the petitioners, property of their

ownership is different and then notice that has been given is different.

The measurement that has been got done gives a different picture and

whatever construction that was made, the petitioner No. 1 had sought

proper permissions for the same.


4.    In our considered opinion, the petition refers to the disputed

questions of facts, which cannot be gone into and therefore, when this


                                   [2]
                                                              922-WP-138-2026.odt


opinion is expressed, learned advocate for the petitioners, upon

instructions, makes a statement that petitioners would approach the

appropriate Court.


5.       In view of said statement we dispose of the petition with liberty as

prayed. Though, learned advocate for Respondent No. 4 and 5 is taking

objection for grant of status quo order, yet we are of the opinion that the

suit is still pending in respect of same gut number before Joint Civil

Judge Senior Division, Majalgaon and even when this Court had passed

order to the Collector to hold enquiry, at that time, also the status quo

order was granted. Then, it will not be any hurdle for giving breathing

time to the petitioners and therefore with liberty to withdraw the petition

we direct the parties to maintain status quo in respect of disputed

structures for a period of one month from today. We make it clear that

this period will not be extended on any count.



[ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ]                     [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ]
       JUDGE                                          JUDGE


Bhagyawant Punde




                                      [3]