Bombay High Court
ASHOK RAMNIWAS VISHWAKARMAversusADDL COLLECTOR (ENCROACHMENT/REMOVAL) WESTERN SUBURB,
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to avail an appropriate legal remedy.
Summary
Ashok Ramniwas Vishwakarma filed a writ petition alleging that despite an order dated 19 June 2017 directing action against a developer, the Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (MHADA) failed to act. MHADA produced a copy of a later order dated 14 February 2019 in Writ Petition (L) No.1151 of 2018, stating that the 2017 order had been set aside, rendering the present petition non‑maintainable. The petitioner’s counsel sought liberty for the petitioner to pursue an appropriate legal remedy. The Court accepted this submission and disposed of the petition by granting the petitioner such liberty. No substantive merits on the original grievance were decided.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition remains maintainable after the earlier order of 19 June 2017 was set aside by the order of 14 February 2019.
- Whether the Court can grant liberty to the petitioner to seek an appropriate legal remedy.
Subjects
- writ petition
- liberty
- set aside order
- MHADA
- developer
- civil procedure
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
CHITRA
SANJAY
5-WP-3064-2026.DOC
CHITRA
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2026.08.18
19:44:37
+0530
Chitra Sonawane.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3064 OF 2026
Ashok Ramniwas Vishwakarma …Petitioner.
Versus
Addl.Collector(Encroachment/Removal) Western …Respondents.
Suburb & Ors.
Mr. Kaustubh Gidh, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. Mohit Jadhav, Addl. GP with Prashant Kamble, AGP for
State/Respondent Nos.1 and 4.
Mr. Girish Utangale i/by Utangale & Co., for the Respondent
No.3/MHADA.
CORAM: SUMAN SHYAM &
ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.
DATED: 17th AUGUST 2026.
PC:-
1. The primary grievance of the Petitioner is to the effect that,
despite the Order dated 19th June 2017, passed by Respondent
No.1, the Respondent No.3-MHADA has failed to take action
against the Developer. In order to enable the learned Counsel for
Respondent No.3 to obtain instructions, we had granted time and
fixed the writ petition today i.e. 17th August 2026.
2. Mr.Girish Utangale, learned Counsel for Respondent
No.3/MHADA has produced a copy of Order dated 14th February
2019, passed in Writ Petition (L) No. 1151 of 2018, to submit that
Page 1 of 2
5-WP-3064-2026.DOC
Order dated 19th June 2017 has already been set aside. The same is
retained in record and marked ‘X’ for identification. Therefore,
direction, as prayed for in this writ petition, would no longer be
maintainable in the eyes of law.
3. Responding to the above submission, learned Counsel for the
Petitioner has submitted that the writ petition can be disposed of
by granting liberty to the Petitioner to avail appropriate legal
remedy in the matter, as may be permissible under the law. Said
submission of the Petitioner's Counsel is found to be reasonable
and is, therefore, accepted.
4. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of by granting
liberty to the Petitioner, as prayed for.
(ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.) (SUMAN SHYAM, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.