Bombay High Court
SURESH ABA NANGAREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Collector must take steps under Section 21(3) and (4) of the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999 to remove obstruction on Plot No. 1, while relief on Plot No. 2 is contingent on the decision in Writ Petition No. 9042 of 2024.
Summary
Petitioner Suresh Aba Nangare filed Writ Petition No. 2102 of 2025 seeking removal of obstruction on a plot allotted to him and the handover of a second plot. The Court noted that the Tahsildar had already ordered the obstructors to vacate Plot No. 1 but they had not complied, and directed the Collector to act under Section 21(3) and (4) of the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999. Regarding Plot No. 2, the Court observed that a stay order in the companion Writ Petition No. 9042 of 2024 prevents its handover and that the matter must be decided in that petition. The Court disposed of WP 2102/2025, giving the petitioner liberty to approach the Court or competent authority in accordance with the outcome of WP 9042/2024. An interim relief in WP 9042/2024 was ordered to continue.
Issues considered
- Whether the Collector can be directed to remove obstruction on Plot No. 1 under the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999.
- Whether the handover of Plot No. 2 can be ordered despite the stay order in Writ Petition No. 9042 of 2024.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999 — s. 21(3), 21(4)
Subjects
- obstruction
- land allotment
- rehabilitation act
- interim order
- stay order
- collector
- tahsildar
- writ petition
Judgment
9-2102-25-wp.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2102 OF 2025
Suresh Aba Nangare
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra And Ors
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 9042 OF 2024
Shankar Eknath Kadam And Throu. Poa And Ors
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra Throu. Ld. Commissioner Pune And Ors
Mr. Gautam Kanchanpurkar, advocate for the Petitioner in
WP 2102/2025
Mr. Laxman Kalel, advocate for the Petitioner in Writ Petition
No. 9042/2024
Ms. Tejas Kapre, AGP for the State
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, &
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 6th AUGUST 2026
IRESH
MASHAL P. C. :
Digitally
signed by
IRESH
MASHAL
Date:
2026.08.06
18:35:02
1. Heard respective parties. Writ Petition No. 2102 of 2025 is
+0530
disposed of with following order.
2. The Collector is directed to take steps in accordance with the
statutory provisions of law to remove the obstructionist qua the
allotment which has been made to the Petitioner in respect of one of
1 of 4
9-2102-25-wp.doc
the subject plots.
3. In so far as the second subject plot is concerned, the
Government has filed an affidavit to the effect stating that in view of
an ad-interim order passed in Writ Petition No. 9042 of 2024, the
possession of that plot cannot be handed over to the Petitioner in
Writ Petition No. 2102 of 2025.
4. Mr. Kanchanpurkar, learned Advocate submits that he has filed
the present petition for two-fold reliefs; One, he submits that in so
far as Plot No. 1 (Old 979/1/1/2 New 589/1/12) which has been
handed over to the Petitioner is concerned, there are certain
obstructions, and the Tahsildar has already taken steps and passed
an order directing the obstructors to remove themselves from Plot
No. 1. However, since they have not removed themselves, he would
urge the Court to pass directions to the Collector directing him to
take steps in accordance with Section 21, sub-sections (3) and (4) of
the Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act, 1999.
5. We accordingly direct the Collector to do the needful if the
Petitioner is entitled to such action on the part of the Collector
pursuant to the action taken by the Tahsildar.
2 of 4
9-2102-25-wp.doc
6. The second issue raised by the Petitioner with regard to
handing over of the second plot, which is admittedly not done by
the State, still persists. It is seen that there is a stay order granted in
the companion petition as admitted to hereinabove. We are ready
and willing to hear that petition in which Mr. Kalel appears for the
Petitioner. There is an intervenor also who has come before the
Court.
7. Prima facie, we feel that subject to any decision taken in Writ
Petition No. 9042 of 2024 and/or after vacating the ad-interim
order that has been passed, the same shall govern the handing over
of Plot No. 2 to the Petitioner.
8. Therefore, once we have given directions to the Collector qua
Plot No. 1, there is no reason as to why the petition should be kept
pending for Plot No. 2. We give liberty to the Petitioner to approach
this Court or the concerned competent authority pursuant to the
decision in Writ Petition No. 9042 of 2024. We also give liberty to
the Petitioner to implead himself in Writ Petition No. 9042 of 2024
in accordance with law and urge the Court to decide the same
expeditiously, because it is the Petitioner's grievance that he has not
3 of 4
9-2102-25-wp.doc
been impleaded in Writ Petition No. 9042 of 2024.
9. The contentions of the intervenor are also kept open in
accordance with law in the pending Writ Petition No. 9042 of 2024.
10. In view of the above observations and directions, Writ Petition
No. 2102 of 2025 stands disposed of. All contentions of the
Petitioner in the pending petition are explicitly kept open.
11. List Writ Petition No. 9042 of 2024 on 13 th August 2026. The
ad-interim relief to continue.
[NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.] [MILIND N. JADHAV, J.]
Iresh
4 of 4
Checking your session…