Bombay High Court
ANIL DIGAMBAR GHARATversusVASAI VIRAR CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that no notice to the private respondents was required and disposed of the petition without addressing the merits, directing the corporation to examine the claim under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1988.
Summary
The petitioner, Anil Digambar Gharat, filed a writ petition alleging encroachment on several survey numbers and sought relief from the Vasai Virar City Municipal Corporation. The petition sought directions for the corporation to examine the petitioner’s claim dated 04/10/2025 under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1988. The Court, noting that the relief sought was confined, declined to issue notice to the private respondents. It directed the corporation to consider the claim in accordance with the Act, giving all stakeholders an opportunity to be heard. The Court disposed of the petition without reaching the merits of the encroachment allegations.
Issues considered
- Whether the Court should issue notice to the private respondents in a writ petition seeking relief against municipal encroachment.
- Whether the municipal corporation is obligated to examine the petitioner’s claim under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1988.
- Whether the petition can be disposed of without adjudicating the substantive merits of the encroachment allegations.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- encroachment
- municipal corporation
- writ petition
- notice
- relief
- Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act
- court disposal
Judgment
34.WP.17615.2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 17615 OF 2025
Anil Digambar Gharat ...Petitioner
Versus
Vasai Virar City Municipal Corporation And Ors ...Respondents
Mr. Subodh Desai, Senior Advocate a/w. Nishtha Gard i/b. Aashka Shell for the
Petitioner.
Mr Tanmay Vasane i/b. Ashwin Kapadnis for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
DATE : 17th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C.:
1. In view of the order we propose to pass, no Notice is required to be issued
to the Respondents as the Petitioner has confined the relief. As per the Survey
Report it is an admitted position that there are certain encroachment over survey
no. 90, Hissa No. 5 and 6 out of 91, 92 out of 93 Hissa No. 1 out of, 94 out of,
Survey No. 137 and 293.
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner having the confined reliefs at this
stage, appropriate directions can be issued to the Respondent-Corporation to
examine the claim set up by the Petitioner and the remedied in accordance with the
law.
3. Considering the factual situation as emerged before us, we are not inclined
to issue notice to the private Respondents. Needless to say, the Respondent-
Corporation may proceed and decide the claim/representation of Petitioner dated
04/10/2025 strictly in consonance with the provision as enshrined in the Mumbai
Municipal Corporation Act, 1988 but certainly after giving ample opportunity to
all the stakeholders.
AKN 1
34.WP.17615.2025.doc
4. The Writ Petition is Disposed Of in light of the above
observations/directions.
5. Suffice to indicate that we have not gone into the merits of the matter.
6. This order has been passed with the due assistance of Mr Tanmay Vasane,
learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]
AKN 2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.