Bombay High Court

SUMIT PRAKASH JAINversusBARSHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL AND ORS.

Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The court granted liberty to withdraw the writ petition and held that the regularisation application must be decided by the Barshi Municipal Council.

Summary

The petitioner, Sumit Prakash Jain, filed a writ petition seeking relief concerning a notice issued under Section 53(1) of the MRTP Act. He indicated that he had already applied to the Barshi Municipal Council for regularisation of the structure under Sections 53(3) and 44(4) of the MRTP Act and requested liberty to withdraw the writ petition, reserving the right to approach the court if the council failed to consider his application on merits. The court examined whether the regularisation application should be decided by the municipal council and whether the petitioner could be allowed to withdraw the writ. It held that the application for regularisation lies within the jurisdiction of the Barshi Municipal Council and that the petitioner may be granted liberty to withdraw the writ. Accordingly, the court granted the liberty to withdraw and disposed of the writ petition as withdrawn.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the writ petition pending a regularisation application before the municipal council.
Whether the Barshi Municipal Council has jurisdiction to decide the regularisation application under Sections 53(3) and 44(4) of the MRTP Act.

Legislation cited

Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning (MRTP) Act — s. 44(4), 53(1), 53(3)

Subjects

regularisation
MRTP Act
writ petition withdrawal
municipal council jurisdiction
Section 53
Section 44

Judgment

                                                        8-WP-2064-2019 (C).docx


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                   CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                  WRIT PETITION NO. 2064 OF 2019
Sumit Prakash Jain                        … Petitioner
           V/s.
Barshi Municipal Council And Ors          … Respondents
                  ________________________
Mr. Dhananjay Chavan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Abhijit Kulkarni, Advocate respondent no.2.
                 _________________________

                               CORAM       : RAJESH S. PATIL &
                                             ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.


                               DATED       : SEPTEMBER 9, 2026
P.C.:


1.      The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, insofar as the

notice dated 30 November 2018 issued under Section 53(1) of the

MRTP Act is concerned, there is no objection to the same. However, he

submits that his client has applied for regularisation of the subject

structure by making an application under Sections 53(3) and 44(4) of

the MRTP Act. He submits that the said application is required to be

decided by the Barshi Municipal Council–respondent No.1.


2.      In view of the same, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks

liberty to withdraw the present Writ Petition, with liberty to avail

appropriate remedy if the said application is not considered on merits.



                                    1/2
adn
                                                       8-WP-2064-2019 (C).docx


3.    Since the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an

application for regularisation has already been made before the Barshi

Municipal Council, if such application has in fact been made by the

petitioner, the same shall be considered and decided by the Barshi

Municipal Council on its own merits, taking into consideration the

applicable rules and regulations.


4.    Liberty, as prayed for, is granted.


5.    Writ Petition stands disposed of as withdrawn.




(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.)                          (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)




                                    2/2
adn

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…