Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

MOHAMAD GOSH ISMAIL DANDEKARversusTHE COLLECTOR/CHAIRMAN PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DAMAN AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The petition is disposed without adverting to the merits of the matter.

Summary

The petitioner, Mohamad Gosh Ismail Dandekar, filed a writ petition challenging the actions of the Collector‑Chairman of the Planning and Development Authority, Daman. The petitioner alleged that his grievance had not been addressed and sought compensation. The respondents submitted that the grievance had already been remedied in accordance with law and that any compensation, if payable, would be paid as per legal provisions. The Court noted the respondents' submission and, without examining the merits of the dispute, disposed of the petition. The judgment expressly states that the Court has not adverted on the merits and that the petition is dismissed.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate legal remedy for the petitioner's grievance against the Planning and Development Authority?
  • Whether compensation, if any, is payable to the petitioner under the applicable law.

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • administrative law
  • compensation
  • grievance redressal
  • high court

Judgment

           Digitally signed
           by PALLAVI
PALLAVI    MAHENDRA
MAHENDRA   WARGAONKAR
WARGAONKAR Date:
           2026.09.22
           10:58:30 +0530
                                                                                       23-WP-2273-2026.odt


      Pallavi
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                               CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                               WRIT PETITION NO.2273 OF 2026

                              Mohamad Gosh Ismail Dandekar                 ...Petitioner
                                           Versus
                              The Collector-chairman Planning And
                              Development Authority Daman And Ors.         ...Respondents

                                                                ...
                              Mr. Sangharsha Shakya i/b. Dinesh R. Sonawane for the Petitioner.
                              Dr. Sanjay Jain a/w Mr. Harsh Dedhia for the Respondents.
                                                                ...

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

                                           DATE     : 21st SEPTEMBER, 2026.


                              P.C.:
                              1.           In response to the order dated 1st April 2026, Mr. Jain,

                              learned counsel for the Respondent – Administration fairly submits

                              the grievance of the Petitioner has already been addressed and

                              remedied in accordance with law. Compensation, if payable, will be

                              paid in accordance with law.

                              2.      With the above observations, The Petition is Disposed of. We

                              clarify that we have not adverted on merits of the matter.




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



                                                                 1


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.