Bombay High Court

HIRABAI KALURAM MIRKUTE AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Decided: 20 August 2026
Disposal: Dismissed

Holding

The Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the 1986 and 1980 orders as valid.

Summary

The petitioners sought a declaration that the 1986 order of the Additional Commissioner, Mumbai, and the 1980 order of the Additional Tahsildar, Ulhasnagar, in a restoration case concerning a 1972 land sale were illegal and bad in law, and prayed for a writ of certiorari under Articles 226 and 227. They argued that the sale was not for non‑agricultural purposes and that the orders should be quashed and stayed. The Court examined the records and found that the sale had been made with the permission of the Sub‑Divisional Officer dated 4 October 1968, and that the challenge was filed after an inordinate delay. The Court held that the belated challenge did not warrant interference with the administrative orders. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed. The order dated 25 July 1986 and the earlier 28 April 1980 order were upheld.

Issues considered

Whether the 1986 order of the Additional Commissioner and the 1980 order of the Additional Tahsildar are illegal and bad in law.
Whether a belated challenge to a land sale authorized in 1968 can be entertained.
Whether the purpose of the sale (non‑agricultural) affects the validity of the orders.

Subjects

writ of certiorari
Article 226
Article 227
restoration case
land sale
belated challenge
administrative law

Judgment

Gitalaxmi                                                7-WP-3277-2024.docx



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                      WRIT PETITION NO. 3277 OF 2024

HIRABAI KALURAM MIRKUTE AND OTHERS                     ...PETITIONERS

                           Versus

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS                    ...RESPONDENTS


     Mr. Sanjay Patil, Advocate for the Petitioners.

     Mr. R. V. Dighe i/b A. S. Rao, Advocates for Respondent No. 6.

     Mr. Parul Abhyankar, Advocates for Respondent No. 8.

     Mr. Bapusaheb Dahiphale, AGP for the State-Respondent.



                                    CORAM     : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.

                                    DATE      : 20th AUGUST, 2026.

Per Court :
1.             Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners.

2.             By the present Petition, the Petitioners seek the following
reliefs :-

            a. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that the Order
            dated 25/7/1986 passed by the Ld. Additional Commissioner,
                                     Page 1 of 3
                                20th AUGUST, 2026
Gitalaxmi                                                   7-WP-3277-2024.docx



            Mumbai     in   Suo      Motto    Proceedings     being     Appeal
            Desk/WTN/4362 to 4364 and 4366 to 4386 arising out of the
            Order dated 28/4/1980 passed by the Ld. ALT, Ulhasnagar in
            Suo motto proceedings being Restoration Case No. 259/80 and
            others 31 be illegal and bad-in-law.

            b. The Petitioners are entitled to a Writ of Certiorari under
            Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India or any other
            appropriate writ and / or directions in the nature of writ of
            certiorari, and the record and proceedings of the said Suo
            motto proceedings being Appeal Desk/WTN/4362 to 4364 and
            4366 to 4386 be called for and after examining the legality and
            propriety thereof, the order dated 25/07/1986 passed by the
            Ld. Additional Commissioner, Mumbai arising out of Order
            dated 28/4/1980 passed by the Ld. ALT, Ulhasnagar in Suo
            Motto proceedings being Restoration Case No. 259/80 and
            others 31 be quashed and set aside.

            c. Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present petition
            the Order dated 25/7/1986 passed by the Ld. Additional
            Commissioner, Mumbai in Suo Motto Proceedings being Appeal
            Desk/WTN/4362 to 4364 and 4366 to 4386 arising out of the
            Order dated 28/4/1980 passed by the Ld. ALT, Ulhasnagar in
            Suo motto proceedings being Restoration Case No. 259/80 and
            others 31 be stayed, on such terms and conditions as this

                                       Page 2 of 3
                                  20th AUGUST, 2026
Gitalaxmi                                                          7-WP-3277-2024.docx



            Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the
            present case.

3.               The order dated 25th July, 1986 of the Additional
Commissioner, so also the order dated 28th April, 1980, passed in the
restoration case by the Additional Tahsildar indicate that the sale
was made with permission of the concerned Sub-Divisional Officer
dated 4th October, 1968, in both these cases and the sales are of the
year 1972. There is a belated challenge to the sale.

4.               As regards the submission of Petitioners that the sale was
for N.A. purposes and the same is not utilized for N.A. purposes, is a
separate issue.                      The impugned order itself indicates that the
proceedings can be initiated thereunder separately, if available under
the law.

5.               Considering that the sale is with permission of the
concerned authority and the challenge being belated, no case is
made out to interfere with.

6.               Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed.




                                                          [ ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ]


                  Digitally signed
                  by GITALAXMI
      GITALAXMI   KRISHNA
      KRISHNA     KOTAWADEKAR
      KOTAWADEKAR Date:
                  2026.08.24
                  19:33:49 +0530
                                                Page 3 of 3
                                           20th AUGUST, 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…