HEMANT VASANTRAO JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. ITS PRINCIPAL SECREARY HOUSING DEPT AND ORS

2026:BHC-KOL:8113-DB

                                                                      15-WP-3906-2025(C).doc


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

                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 3906 OF 2025

               Hemant Vasantrao Jadhav                                   ...Petitioner
                         Versus
               The State of Maharashtra and Others                       ...Respondents

                                            ——————
               Mr. Vijay Patil, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Digambar V. Jadhav, for the
               Petitioner.
               Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondent-State.
               Mr. Abhijit M. Adagule for Respondent No.3 – Corporation.
                                              ——————

                                                CORAM :       SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH &
                                                              NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.

                                                DATE       : AUGUST 27, 2026.

               P. C. :

               1.        By the present Petition, the Petitioner seeks a direction to the

               Respondent No. 3- Municipal Commissioner to forthwith submit a report

               to the State Government which was called for by the State Government

               by the communication dated 27th October, 2020.

               2.        Mr. Patil, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioner

               submits that the Petitioner's ancestors were the original owners of land

               bearing Survey No. 1243/2, admeasuring about 10 Gunthas, and in the

               town planning scheme which was sanctioned in the year 1970 and


               Jamadar-SL                         1 of 4
                                                      15-WP-3906-2025(C).doc


implemented in the State of Kolhapur, the lands of the original owners

were reshuffled and they were allotted alternate land. He would further

submit that an award was passed, whereby the Petitioner's grandfather

was proposed to be allotted final Plots No. 97 and 105 and the

Respondent No.3 - Corporation, without any authority, passed a

resolution allotting both these plots to one Vasant Ramchandra Jadhav.

He would submit that the final plot No. 96/A, which was given as an

alternate plot, was not accepted by the Petitioner's grandfather, and

representations were made by the Petitioners for the alternate plot.

3.     He would submit that from the year 1989 till date, the Petitioner

and his family have not been allotted any alternate plot. He would

submit that in the year 2002, the General Body Resolution of Kolhapur

Municipal Corporation proposed to apply to the State Government to

allot an area admeasuring 5000 sq. ft. from final plot No. 145/A to the

legal heirs of the Petitioner's grandfather. He submits that the

Municipal Corporation applied to the Principal Secretary of the State of

Maharashtra for correction in the town planning scheme on 2 nd April,

2002 and also replied to all queries raised. He would submit that it was

also pointed out by the Commissioner that under the town planning

scheme, it is only the Petitioner who is yet to receive the alternate land.

He submits that on 16th September, 2003, the Director of Town Planning

granted its no objection to the proposal of the Kolhapur Municipal


Jamadar-SL                       2 of 4
                                                      15-WP-3906-2025(C).doc


Corporation. He submits that on 6 th December, 2018, the State

Government addressed a communication to the Assistant Town Planner

of the Corporation asking for documents of the Petitioner which were

duly submitted, and thereafter, on 27 th October, 2020, the Under

Secretary of the State of Maharashtra addressed a communication to

the Corporation seeking a report for ascertaining the status of the plot

which is not yet submitted, leading to the present Petition.

4.       Learned counsel appearing for the Municipal Corporation would

not dispute the facts which are canvassed by Mr. Patil, learned Senior

Advocate for the Petitioner and would submit that due compliance will

be done in respect of the communication of 27th October, 2020 and

report will be accordingly submitted.

5.       Despite several representations being made by the Petitioners for

seeking allotment of the alternate plot, it is only in the year 2018 that

documents of the Petitioners were called for. Though the State of

Maharashtra on 27th October, 2020, had called for a report from the

Municipal Commissioner for ascertaining the situation of the plot, no

action was taken by the Municipal Corporation and a period of almost

six years has elapsed. It is expected that when a town planning scheme

is implemented, there would be allotment of the plots to the original

owners, which has not happened in the present case for the last several

years.


Jamadar-SL                        3 of 4
                                                     15-WP-3906-2025(C).doc


6.     We also find that the Petitioner has, after the communication of

27th October, 2020, addressed several representations in 2022 and 2024

to the Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, calling upon him to

submit a report as called for from the State Government.

7.     As the report is required to be submitted before the plot can be

allotted to the Petitioner, we direct the Respondent No.3 - Municipal

Corporation to submit a report to the State Government as called for by

the communication dated 27th October, 2020 expeditiously, and in any

event within a period of three weeks from today.

8.     As after the report is submitted by the Municipal Corporation, the

scheme is required to be altered and a notification to be issued for

allotment of alternate land, it is expected that the same will be done

expeditiously considering that the Petitioner's plot was reshuffled in

the town planning scheme of the year 1970 and Petitioner is still

awaiting an alternate plot.

9.     The Petition is allowed and disposed of in the above terms.




 [NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.]                    [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]




Jamadar-SL                       4 of 4