Bombay High Court
VYANKATESH MARUTI PAWARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court held that the regularisation of the structures should be decided by the Pune Municipal Corporation, directing a fresh application within four weeks and ordering expeditious action if regularisation is denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Vyankatesh Maruti Pawar, filed a writ petition seeking directions to the State of Maharashtra and other authorities to act against alleged illegal constructions at Wagholi, Pune. The respondents (Nos.5‑8) claimed the buildings were authorized by the Gram Panchayat and that a regularisation application had been filed with the Pune Metropolitan Region Development Authority (PMRDA). The court noted a PMRDA notification dated 11‑02‑2026 that incorporated the unauthorised structures into the jurisdiction of the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC). It directed that the respondents file a fresh regularisation application with the PMC within four weeks, to be decided on merits within twelve weeks, and that any deficiencies be communicated to the petitioner. If the PMC does not regularise the structures, it must take appropriate action against them after providing an opportunity to the respondents. The writ petition was consequently disposed with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether the structures at Wagholi constitute illegal constructions under Sections 52‑56 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a direction for immediate demolition or action against the structures.
- Whether the matter should be referred to the Pune Municipal Corporation for regularisation and, if denied, for enforcement action.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act — s. 52, 53, 54, 55, 56
Subjects
- illegal construction
- regularisation
- Pune Municipal Corporation
- PMRDA
- Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act
- writ petition
- municipal authority
Judgment
Digitally signed
by ARUNA
ARUNA SANDEEP
SANDEEP TALWALKAR
TALWALKAR Date:
2026.09.02
17:19:20 +0530
32.WP13806.2024.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.13806 OF 2024
Vyankatesh Maruti Pawar. … Petitioner.
Versus
State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents.
------------
Mr. Rahul V. Shinde, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Tukaram Shendge a/w. Mr. Rushikesh Salunkhe i/b. Mr. Manoj
Bagal, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 5 to 8.
Mr. Ashwin R. Kapadnis, Advocate for Respondent No. 4 PMRD.
Mr. Abhijit P. Kulkarni a/w. Ms. Sweta Shah, Advocate for
Respondent No. 9 PMC.
Smt. R.M. Shinde, AGP for Respondent State.
-----------
CORAM : M. S. KARNIK &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 1st SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C. :
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.
2. We request Mr. Kulkarni to appear on behalf of the
Corporation. Mr. Kulkarni submitted that he needs some time
obtain instructions. However, to assist this Court, it is at our
request that Mr. Kulkarni has appeared. His engagement be
regularised by the Corporation.
Talwalkar 1
32.WP13806.2024.odt
3. Leave to amend. Amendment to be carried out forthwith
to add Pune Municipal Corporation as Party – Respondent No.9.
4. By this Petition, the Petitioner seeks directions to
Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to take action against illegal constructions
carried by the Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 at Gat No. 1357 situated at
Wagholi, Pune under Provisions of Section 52 to 56 of Maharashtra
Regional Town Planning Act.
5. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the
buildings in question are unauthorised. The learned Counsel for
the Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 submitted that the buildings had been
constructed after taking due permission from the Gram Panchayat.
It is further submitted that the application for regularisation was
filed before the Pune Metropolitan Region Development Authority
(PMRDA). Mr. Kapadnis, learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 4
PMRDA submits that by a notification dated 11/2/2026,
unauthorised structure now is included in the Pune Municipal
Corporation (PMC).
6. Hence, the issue needs to be examined by the PMC.
Learned Counsel submitted that an application for
regularisation/retention would be made to the PMC. It is open for
Talwalkar 2
32.WP13806.2024.odt
the Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 to make an appropriate application to
the PMC for regularisation/retention. A fresh application for
regularisation be made before the PMC within a period of four
weeks today. The same be considered on its own merits and in
accordance with law within a period of 12 weeks therefrom.
Deficiency, if any, in the proposal for regularisation be
communicated to the Petitioner to enable the Petitioner to rectify
the same. A decision on the application for regularisation be taken
expeditiously.
7. In case, the structures of Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 are not
regularised, the Pune Municipal Corporation then shall take action
against the said structures in accordance with law after giving an
opportunity to the Respondent Nos. 5 to 8. Appropriate action be
take expeditiously.
8. With the above observations, the Writ Petition is disposed
of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.)
Talwalkar 3
Checking your session…