Bombay High Court

VIJAY VASANT ANGNEversusCITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. AND ORS

Decided: 13 January 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: RAVINDRA V GHUGE ABHAY MANTRI

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed; the petitioner must approach the civil court for relief regarding encroachment and boundary disputes.

Summary

The petitioner, Vijay Vasant Angane, filed a writ petition seeking a direction that the City and Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO) enforce a public notice dated 17‑04‑2017, which called for removal of encroachments, including the petitioner’s structure. CIDCO argued that any boundary or encroachment disputes must be resolved through the civil courts, with joint measurement and demarcation, and that appropriate orders for removal can be sought there. The Court examined whether a writ could compel CIDCO to act on the notice and concluded that the matter falls within the civil jurisdiction, not the writ jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, with the Court directing the petitioner to file a civil suit for any disputed issues. The judgment emphasizes that CIDCO will pursue the public notice to its logical end, but aggrieved parties must seek relief through ordinary civil proceedings.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can issue a writ directing CIDCO to enforce removal of encroachments under the public notice
Whether the petitioner should approach the civil court for boundary demarcation and removal of encroachments

Subjects

encroachment
public notice
civil suit
jurisdiction
writ petition
CIDCO
property boundary

Judgment

TRUPTI
SADANAND
BAMNE
Digitally signed by
TRUPTI SADANAND                                                                  904-wp-14690-2023.odt
BAMNE
Date: 2026.01.14
17:43:59 +0530




                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 14690 OF 2023

                      Vijay Vasant Angane                            … Petitioner
                            versus
                      City and Industrial Development
                      Corporation Ltd., and Others                   … Respondents

                                                      ...
                      Mr.Ganesh Bhujbal i/b. Mr. Baburav D. Shinde for the Petitioner.
                      Mr.G.S.Hegde, Senior Advocate with Ms.P.M.Bhansali for the
                      Respondent -CIDCO.
                                                      ...

                                             CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &
                                                     ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

                                             DATE      : JANUARY 13, 2026

                      P.C:


                      1.         The only prayer put forth by the Petitioner is that the City

                      and Industrial Development Corporation (CIDCO) published a public

                      notice dated 17.04.2017, in Daily Sakal newspaper, whereby all

                      encroachers were intimated to remove their offending structures and

                      yet, the structures are not removed. The Petitioner’s structure is also

                      affected on account of the encroachment.




                      Trupti                                                                      ...1
                                                           904-wp-14690-2023.odt




2.          The learned Senior Advocate for the CIDCO submits that

the CIDCO would deal with the issues by following the due

procedure laid down in law. If there is any dispute regarding the

boundaries and the encroachment between the parties, the Petitioner

may approach the Civil Court for seeking a joint measurement of the

properties and demarcation of the boundaries. If an encroachment is

noticed, the Petitioner may seek appropriate orders for removal of

the encroachment and restoration of possession, from the Civil

Court.



3.          In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed off

with the observation that the CIDCO would attempt to take the

public notice to its logical end. If there are disputed issues, the

Petitioner would be at liberty to file a Civil Suit and seek appropriate

remedies.




(ABHAY J.MANTRI, J.)                (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)




Trupti                                                                      ...2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…