Bombay High Court
ASHOK R. DUDWADKARversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH GOVT.PLEADER
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The writ petition is disposed as there is no longer any question for the court; the S.R.A. must implement its order to put the petitioner in possession of Flat No.2108.
Summary
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking quash of a notice issued under Sections 89 and 90 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, after being allotted Flat No.2108 in a rehabilitation scheme. Subsequent developments showed that the petitioner was confirmed as eligible for the flat, but the developer refused to hand over possession and attempted to pressure the petitioner to withdraw a related petition. The S.R.A. subsequently issued an order on 22 June 2026 directing the Executive Engineer to ensure the petitioner’s possession of the flat. The court observed that the matter now lies with the Executive Engineer for implementation of the S.R.A. order and that there is nothing further for judicial consideration. Accordingly, the writ petition and the related interim application were disposed, with a direction that the S.R.A. implement its order within six weeks, subject to any legal impediments.
Issues considered
- Whether the notice issued under Sections 89 and 90 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, should be quashed.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to possession of the allotted rehabilitation flat.
- Whether the court should continue to entertain the petition after the S.R.A. issued an order directing possession.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 — s. 89, 90
Subjects
- Writ petition
- Possession
- Rehabilitation unit
- Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act
- Quashing notice
- Implementation of order
Judgment
35. WP 786-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.786 OF 2024
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.18708 OF 2026
Ashok R. Dudwadkar … Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra
Through Government Pleader and Ors. … Respondents
…..
Mr. Aseem Naphade a/w Mr. Haamid Ahmed for the
Petitioner/Applicant.
Smt. Jyoti Chavan, Addl. G.P. a/w Smt. Gauri Sawant, A.G.P. for
Respondent No.1-State.
Ms. Yashi Bhatt i/b Ravleen Sabharwal for the Respondent-S.R.A.
Ms. Jyoti Mhatre i/b Adv. Komal Punjabi for Respondent No.3.
…..
CORAM: M.S. KARNIK &
SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.
DATED : 16th SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner has pointed out that
after filing of the Petition, there have been subsequent developments.
This Petition was filed for quashing the notice dated 28 th August
2023 under Sections 89 & 90 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town
Planning Act, 1966. Thereafter, the Petitioner was declared eligible
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 1/4
35. WP 786-2024.doc
under Annexure No.193 on 8 th July, 2005. The Petitioner was allotted
Flat No.2108 in Bhagwandas Shriram CHS Prabhadevi. Thereafter
the Petitioner for confirmation of the same, had applied through RTI
on 17th July, 2025, for getting the details of the allotted premises to
him. By Reply dated 23rd July, 2025, the S.R.A. had confirmed that
the Petitioner was allotted Flat No.2108 in ‘B’ Wing, Floor No.21,
Rehab Building No.01, Bhagwandas Shriram CHS Prabhadevi,
Mumbai-400 025.
2. It is the grievance of the Petitioner that the developer is not
handing over the rehab unit and is pressurizing the Petitioner to
withdraw Writ Petition No.699 of 2024, filed by his son for
commercial unit and thereafter the developer will handover the
rehab unit to the Petitioner.
3. As a result of the subsequent development, the notice issued by
the S.R.A. to the developer has culminated into an Order dated 22 nd
June, 2026, passed by the Assistant Registrar, S.R.A. Accordingly, the
S.R.A. had directed the Executive Engineer to ensure that the
Petitioner is put in possession of Flat No.2108. The copy of the
communication dated 22nd June, 2026, is taken on record and
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 2/4
35. WP 786-2024.doc
marked as ‘X’ for identification.
4. In such view of the matter, nothing survives for further
consideration in the present Petition, as it is now for the Executive
Engineer, G/North Ward, S.R.A., to take appropriate action and
ensure that the Petitioner is put in possession.
5. We have requested the learned Counsel for the S.R.A. to appear
and assist this Court. Though the learned Counsel for the S.R.A.
submitted that she needs some time to obtain instructions,
considering that the S.R.A. must comply with its own order, we do
not find it necessary to grant time to the learned Counsel for the
S.R.A. to obtain instructions.
6. The S.R.A. to ensure that a communication dated 22 nd June,
2026, which is placed on record and marked as ‘X’ for identification,
should be implemented and ensure that the Petitioner is put in
possession of Flat No.2108, expeditiously, and in any case, within a
period of six weeks from the date of communication of this Order,
subject to there being any legal impediments.
7. The Writ Petition is disposed of.
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 3/4
35. WP 786-2024.doc
8. In view of disposal of the Writ Petition, nothing further survives
for consideration in Interim Application (L) No.18708 of 2026 and
the same also stands disposed of.
(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M.S. KARNIK, J.)
RaJesh Chittewan, PS 4/4
Digitally signed
RAJESH by RAJESH
VASANT
VASANT CHITTEWAN
CHITTEWAN Date: 2026.09.17
18:37:13 +0530
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.