Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

KRISHNA NARAYAN VETALversusMUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GR. MUMBAI

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court directed the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai to decide the petitioner’s pending complaints within two months, without addressing the substantive merits.

Summary

The petitioner, Krishna Narayan Vetal, filed a writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari or mandamus directing the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai to initiate action against three respondents for alleged illegal construction and to demolish the structures. The petitioner alleged that multiple complaints filed on 19 December 2024, 21 April 2025, 30 September 2025 and 17 December 2025 had not been considered by the corporation. The Court, without examining the merits, ordered, with the parties' consent, that the corporation decide the pending complaints within two months, after hearing all stakeholders. The direction was issued under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, the Development Control Regulations and the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966. The writ petition was thereafter disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court can issue a writ of certiorari or mandamus directing a municipal corporation to act on pending complaints of illegal construction.
  • Whether the corporation’s failure to consider the complaints is reviewable by the Court.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Writ of Certiorari
  • Mandamus
  • Municipal Corporation
  • Illegal Construction
  • Development Control Regulations
  • Administrative Inaction
  • Expeditious Hearing

Judgment

                                                                                              12-WP.1959.2026.doc

         Salunke
                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                     ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
           Digitally
           signed by
           JAYANT
JAYANT     VISHWANATH
VISHWANATH SALUNKE
SALUNKE    Date:
                                            WRIT PETITION NO. 1959 OF 2026
           2026.09.11
           18:47:56
           +0530


                        Krishna Narayan Vetal alias Bhanudas}
                        Narayan Vetal                       }                   Petitioner
                             Versus
                        Municipal Corporation of Greater    }
                        Mumbai & Ors.                       }                   Respondents


                        Mr. Prathamesh Seth with Ms. Trupti                          Gosavi,
                        Ms.Vrunali Kirtikar and Ms. Grishma                          Karane,
                        Advocates for the Petitioner.

                        Ms. Shweta Patankar, Advocate for Respondent-BMC.

                        Mr. Sandip Sawant, Sub-Engineer (B&F) H/West Ward
                        present.


                                       CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
                                               ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.

                                       DATE       : 10th SEPTEMBER, 2026

                        P.C.:
                        1.      Heard Mr. Prathamesh Seth, the learned counsel for the
                        Petitioner and Ms. Shweta Patankar, the learned counsel appearing
                        for the Respondent-BMC.

                        2.      The instant Writ Petition is preferred, inter alia, for the
                        following relief: -

                                “(a)   this Hon’ble Court be pleased to admit the Petition;
                                (b)     this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of Certiorari and/or
                                any other appropriate Writ, Order or direction in the nature of
                                Mandamus ordering and directing the Respondent No. 1 to forthwith
                                initiate action against the Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 under the provisions
                                of the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, Development Control
                                Regulations and the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act,
                                1966 in respect of the unauthorized and illegal construction of the

                                                                  1
                                                                     12-WP.1959.2026.doc


        Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 at 214/B, Shri Laxmi Nivas, 21 st Road, C. T. S.
        No. D/854 of Village Peth-Danda, Taluka Andheri, Mumbai Suburban
        District, Khar Danda, Khar (West), Mumbai-400 052 and to demolish
        the illegal and unauthorized work forthwith.”

3.      The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the
Petitioner has filed several complaints/representations way back on
19th December 2024, 21st April 2025, 30th September 2025 and 17th
December 2025 addressed to the Respondent No. 1-Corporation.
The said complaints/representations have not been considered
and/or decided till date. Hence, the Petitioner has invoked the
jurisdiction of this Court. He submits that the Respondent No. 1-
Corporation         be      directed         to   decide       the        aforesaid
complaints/representations expeditiously and in accordance with
law.

4.      Without adverting to the merits of the case, with consent of
the parties, we dispose of the Petition with a direction to the
concerned authorities of the Respondent No. 1-Corporation do
decide the complaints/representations filed by the Petitioner on 19 th
December 2024, 21st April 2025, 30th September 2025 and 17th
December 2025 expeditiously and preferably within a period of two
months from today, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all
the stake holders.

5.      With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.



       [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]                           [CHIEF JUSTICE]




                                         2


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.