Bombay High Court

Diwakar Damodar ShindeversusPratapgad Co-operative Housing Society Ltd

Decided: 11 September 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

MHADA, not the municipal corporation, is the appropriate authority to take action on the unauthorized construction complaint.

Summary

The petitioner, Diwakar Damodar Shinde, filed a writ petition alleging unauthorized construction in a MHADA layout and sought remedial action. The petitioner argued that only MHADA, not the municipal corporation, has the authority to address such complaints. Respondents, including MHADA and the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), contended that the corporation lacks jurisdiction over MHADA layouts. The Court examined the statutory framework governing MHADA developments and held that MHADA is the appropriate authority to act on the complaint. Accordingly, the Court directed MHADA to take appropriate action within 12 weeks and disposed of the petition.

Issues considered

Whether the municipal corporation has jurisdiction to act on unauthorized construction in a MHADA layout
Whether MHADA is the appropriate authority to address the petitioner's complaint

Subjects

unauthorised construction
MHADA layout
jurisdiction
municipal corporation
writ petition

Judgment

                                                                             906-wp 4281-26.doc
ARJUN
MACHHINDRA
KADAM                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
Digitally signed by
ARJUN
MACHHINDRA
KADAM
Date: 2026.09.11
                                         WRIT PETITION NO. 4281 OF 2026
18:54:30 +0530


                      Diwakar Damodar Shinde                                … Petitioner
                              Versus
                      Pratapgad Co-op. Housing Society Ltd. & Ors.           ... Respondents
                                        __________________________

                      Mr. Mukesh J. Pabari (through VC) for the Petitioner.
                      Mr. P. G. Lad a/w. Mr. Muralidharan Kalathil for the Respondent-
                      MHADA.
                      Ms. Jyoti Mhatre i/b Ms. Komal Punjabi and Mr. Abay Raje Jagtap,
                      AE (B&F) for Respondent No.5-BMC.
                                         __________________________

                                                     CORAM      : M. S. KARNIK AND
                                                                  SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
                                                     DATED      : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026.

                      P.C. :

                      1.            Learned counsel for the petitioner says that this being a

                      MHADA layout where the unauthorised construction is carried out, it

                      is for MHADA to take appropriate action.

                      2.            We have heard Mr. Lad, learned counsel for MHADA.

                      3.            Learned counsel for the Corporation submitted that since

                      this is a MHADA layout, it is for MHADA to take action as

                      Corporation has no authority to act on the complaint made by the

                      petitioner.

                       Amk                                                             1/2
                                                      906-wp 4281-26.doc

4.           This being the position, MHADA to take appropriate

action on the basis of the complaint dated 27 th April, 2026, made by

the petitioner at Exhibit ‘H’ expeditiously and after hearing the

concerned person who may be affected by such action. Necessary

action be taken within a period of 12 weeks from the date of

communication of this Order in accordance with law.

5.           The petition is disposed of.



     (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)                     (M. S. KARNIK, J.)




 Amk                                                            2/2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.