Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

KRISHNA SINDHU CO-OP HSG SOCIETY LTD THROU. NITIN BABAN HIRDEversusDISTRICT COLLECTOR RAIGAD AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The writ petition is disposed of without merits, with the Court directing the competent authority to decide the matter within three months.

Summary

The Krishna Sindhu Co-operative Housing Society Ltd filed a writ petition alleging an encroachment of 640 square metres on Block No. 3 of Survey No. 65/4 and seeking redress against the District Collector, Raigad and others. A notice under Section 53 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 had been issued by the Tehsildar on 25 May 2026, but the proceedings under the Act had not yet been finalized. The High Court observed that remedial action should be taken by the competent authority under the MRTP Act and that the petition need not remain pending. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the competent authority to make a final decision within three months of the order. The Court expressly refrained from examining the merits of the encroachment claim, leaving it for the appropriate authority.

Issues considered

  • Whether the High Court should entertain and continue a writ petition when a notice under Section 53 of the MRTP Act has already been issued and the matter is pending before the competent authority.
  • Whether the Court can direct the competent authority to decide the matter expeditiously without adjudicating the merits.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • encroachment
  • Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act
  • Section 53
  • competent authority
  • land planning
  • jurisdiction
  • disposal

Judgment

ANANT
KRISHNA
NAIK                                                                                       32.WP.8703.2026.doc
Digitally signed by
ANANT KRISHNA
NAIK
Date: 2026.09.29
11:38:15 +0530




                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                             WRIT PETITION NO. 8703 OF 2026

                      Krishna Sindhu Co-operative Housing Society Ltd               ...Petitioner
                             Vs.
                      District Collector, Raigad & Ors.                             ...Respondents

                      Mr. Suyash Sule for the Petitioner.
                      Mrs. M. P. Thakur, AGP for the Respondent No. 1 and 2-State.


                                          CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
                                                  ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.

                                          DATE      : 28th SEPTEMBER, 2026.

                      P.C.:


                      1.      We have heard the learned Counsel for Petitioner and learned AGP for the

                      Respondent-State. The Division Bench of this Court vide an Order dated 30 th July,

                      2026 has issued Notice to the Respondents, returnable on 20th August, 2026.

                      Humdast was also permitted.


                      2.      Learned Counsel for Petitioner makes a statement that steps to serve the

                      Respondents were taken well within time. He submits that the Petitioner preferred

                      this Writ Petition seeking redressal of his Complaint against the Respondent-

                      Authorities, in spite of the Notice being issued under Section 53 of the

                      Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short “the MRTP Act”)

                      on 25th May, 2026 by the concerned Tehsildar. However, until date, such

                      proceeding has not been finalized. On the said property, there is an encroachment

                      over Block No. 3 of Survey No. 65/4 admeasuring 640 square meters, which forms

                      the subject matter of the Petitioner’s complaint/grievance.


                      AKN                                    1
                                                                     32.WP.8703.2026.doc


3.     Considering the reliefs as prayed for, we find that remedial measures would

be taken under the MRTP Act, by the Competent Authority. In view thereof, no

purpose would be served to keep the matter pending consideration or wait for the

response to the Notice issued. We expect the Competent Authority to take a final

call in accordance with law, in case there is no other legal impediment, certainly

after giving ample opportunity of hearing to all stakeholders.


4.     In view of the above, we dispose of the Writ Petition with an observation

that the Competent Authority must take a final call in view of the Notice dated 25 th

May, 2026 (Supra) expeditiously and preferably within three months from the date

of uploading of this Order.


5.     We clarify that we have not adverted to the merits of the matter, keeping it

open to be urged before the concerned/Competent Respondent Authorities.

6.     In view of the above, the Writ Petition stands Disposed Of.




          [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]                       [CHIEF JUSTICE]




AKN                                    2


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.