Bombay High Court
MARUTI CHANDRAKANT LAD AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. SECRETARY AND ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court ordered the respondent to decide the petitioners' representations in accordance with law, without adjudicating the merits of the allocation claim.
Summary
The petitioners, rehabilitated project‑affected persons in Gat No. 62, filed a writ petition alleging that the State of Maharashtra had failed to consider their representations seeking allotment of vacant plots for a common amenity space. They contended that despite multiple representations, no decision had been rendered. The High Court examined the limited grievance and, without delving into the substantive merits, directed Respondent No. 4 to decide the pending representations in accordance with law. The Court clarified that it was not passing on the merits of the allocation claim. Consequently, the petition was disposed with a directive to the respondent to act on the representations.
Issues considered
- Whether the State of Maharashtra failed to consider the petitioners' representations for allotment of vacant plots for common amenity space.
Subjects
- rehabilitation
- land allocation
- common amenity space
- writ petition
- representation
- administrative law
- high court
Judgment
2026:BHC-KOL:9115-DB
31-WP-9030-2022(C).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 9030 OF 2022
Maruti Chandrakant Lad And Others ...Petitioners.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents.
——————
Mr. Anand S. Patil a/w Mr. Soham V. Powar a/w Mr. Pratik B. Bhakare, for the
Petitioners.
Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for the Respondent-State.
——————
Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
Date : September 22, 2026.
P. C. :
1. Learned counsel for Petitioners would submit that though several
reliefs are sought, the petitioners confine their grievance to
non-consideration of the Petitioners’ representations for allotting the
vacant plots in Gat No.62 for the purpose of common amenity space to
the present Petitioners, who were rehabilitated as project-affected
persons in Gat No. 62.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that,
various representations were made for allotment of common amenity
space, which have not been considered.
3. Considering the limited grievance, the Petition is disposed of by
directing the Respondent No.4 to decide the representations, if not,
already decided.
Jamadar - SL 1 of 2
31-WP-9030-2022(C).doc
4. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the
matter, and the representation to be decided strictly in accordance with
law.
[Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]
Jamadar - SL 2 of 2
Checking your session…