Bombay High Court
DNYANESHWAR JOTIRAM GOVE AND ANRversusMANGALVEDHA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL THR. ITS CHIEF OFFICER AND ANR
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court directed the State to dispose of the pending appeal under Section 47 of the MRTP Act by 31 October 2026.
Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a direction to the State to decide an appeal they had filed on 20 February 2025 under Section 47 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, challenging a municipal council order dated 21 January 2025. The appeal had not been taken up for hearing. The State argued that the appeal would be disposed of within a reasonable time. The Court, without examining the merits of the underlying dispute, ordered the State to dispose of the appeal expeditiously, preferably by 31 October 2026. The direction was limited to procedural compliance and the petition was disposed of without any order as to costs.
Issues considered
- What is the scope of the Court's power under Article 226 to direct a State authority to dispose of a pending appeal within a specified time?
- Whether a direction to expedite the disposal of an appeal under Section 47 of the MRTP Act is appropriate in the absence of a substantive hearing of the petition.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 226
- Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 — s. 47
Subjects
- Writ petition
- Article 226
- Section 47
- Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act
- Administrative delay
- Time‑bound disposal
- Municipal council order
Judgment
19 wp-844-2026(c).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 844 OF 2026
Dnyandeshwar Jotiram Gove and Others. ...Petitioners.
Versus
Mangalvedha Municipal Council and Others. ...Respondents.
——————
Ms. Indrayani Patil and Mr. Kedar Lad for the Petitioners.
Mr. Vikas M. Mali, AGP for the Respondent-State (Respondent No. 2).
——————
Coram : Madhav J. Jamdar &
Pravin S. Patil, JJ.
Date : March 4, 2026.
P. C. :
1. Heard Ms. Indrayani Patil, learned Counsel appearing for the
Petitioners and Mr. Vikas Mali, learned AGP for the Respondent-State.
2. In this petition, iled under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, a very limited relief has been sought. The prayer clause (a) reads
thus :
“(a) this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue an appropriate
writ, order or direction and direct the Respondent No.2 to
decide the appeal dated 20.02.2025 iled by the Petitioners
before Respondent No.2 within time bound programme in the
interest of justice.”
3. It is the submission of Ms. Patil, learned Counsel appearing for
the Petitioners that although on 17 th February 2025, an appeal under
Section 47 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966
Patil-SR 1 of 2
19 wp-844-2026(c).doc
[for short, “MRTP Act”] has been iled before the Minister, Urban
Development Department, Government of Maharashtra challenging
the order dated 21st January 2025 passed by Mangalwedha Municipal
Council, till date the said appeal has not been taken up for hearing.
4. Learned AGP states that within a reasonable time, said appeal
will be disposed of.
5. Accordingly, Respondent No.2 is directed to dispose the appeal
iled by Petitioners under Section 47 of the MRTP Act, 1966
challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 21 st January
2025 passed by Mangalwedha Municipal Council, as expeditiously as
possible and preferably on or before 31st October 2026.
6. It is clariied that this Court has not considered merits of the
matter and all contentions are expressly kept open.
7. Writ petition is disposed of in above terms with no order as to
costs.
[Pravin S. Patil, J.] [Madhav J. Jamdar, J.]
Patil-SR 2 of 2
Checking your session…