Bombay High Court
EKTA PARKSVILLE HOMES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANRversusVASAI VIRAR CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court directed the Respondent Municipal Corporation to consider the petitioners' applications within three months, without deciding the substantive merits.
Summary
The petitioners, Ekta Parksville Homes Pvt Ltd and others, sought a declaration that a plinth completion certificate for certain building wings should be deemed granted under Section 45 of the MRTP Act and Regulation 2.8.3 of the DCR 2001, or alternatively, a writ of mandamus directing the municipal corporation to process their applications dated 31 March 2023 and 10 June 2024. The petitioners limited their relief to the mandamus prayer. The Court, after hearing counsel, declined to address the merits of the application and instead ordered the competent authority of the municipal corporation to consider the petitioners' representations within three months of the order. No substantive finding on the entitlement to the certificate was made. The petition was consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the municipal corporation is obligated to grant a plinth completion certificate under Section 45 of the MRTP Act read with Regulation 2.8.3 of the DCR 2001.
- Whether a writ of mandamus is the appropriate remedy to compel the corporation to process the petitioners' applications.
Legislation cited
- Development Control Regulations, 2001 — s. Regulation 2.8.3
- Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act — s. 45
Subjects
- mandamus
- plinth completion certificate
- MRTP Act
- municipal corporation
- writ petition
- development control regulations
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
CHITRA
CHITRA SANJAY
SANJAY SONAWANE
SONAWANE Date:
2026.09.29
12:05:52
+0530
Chitra Sonawane. 35-WP-9631-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.9631 OF 2026
Ekta Parksville Homes Pvt
Ltd & Anr. .. Petitioners.
Vs.
Vasai Virar City Municipal Corp. & Ors. ... Respondents.
...
Mr. Birendra Saraf, Sr. Advocate a/w Bhushan Deshmukh, Mrs Jasmine
Kachalia, Mr Sahil Singh, Ms Shweta Chopra, Roshan Mohod i/by Wadia
Ghandy & Co. for Petitioners.
Mr Swapnil Patil for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Ms NS Bhide, GP a/w Mrs RM Shinde AGP for State.
...
CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
DATE : 28th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C. :
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. The instant Petition has been preferred by the Petitioner with
following substantive reliefs :
" (a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to declare that the
plinth completion certificate for construction of the said
Wings i.e., Wings A, B, C and D of Building No. 16 in Sector
II of the said Land, is deemed to have been granted in
terms of Section 45 of the MRTP Act read with Regulation
2.8.3 of the DCR 2001, in view of the fact that a duly
1
Chitra Sonawane. 35-WP-9631-2026.doc
completed application vide letter dated 31st March 2023
read with the letter dated 10th June 2024 (Exhibit 'N', and
Exhibit 'O' hereto respectively), has been received by
Respondent No. 2 but not been responded to or refused;
(b) In the alternative to prayer clause (a), that this Hon'ble
Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ or any other appropriate order or direction
in the nature of mandamus directing Respondent Nos. 1
and 2 to process and grant plinth completion certificate and
further permissions for construction of the said Wings, i.e.,
Wings A, B, C and D of Building No. 16 in Sector II of the
said Land, as applied by Petitioner No. Ivide the said
Application, i.e., letter dated 31st March 2023 read with
the letter dated 10th June 2024 (Exhibit 'N', and Exhibit 'O'
hereto respectively), in accordance with law, within a
period of 2 weeks or such other time, as this Hon'ble Court
deems fit and proper "
3. At the outset, Mr.Birendra Saraf, the learned Sr. Counsel submits
that he is not pressing prayer clause (a). He submits that he confines the
relief to prayer clause (b) wherein it is prayed that the
Respondent/Authorities may be directed to decide the Petitioner's
representation in form of Letters dated 31st March 2023 and 10th June
2024.
4. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, we expect the
concerned/ Competent Authority of the Respondent-Corporation to
consider and decide the representation of the Petitioners contained in
2
Chitra Sonawane. 35-WP-9631-2026.doc
Letters dated 31st March 2023 and 10th June 2024, preferably within 3
months from the date of uploading of this order.
5. We make it clear that we have not adverted to the merits of the
matter.
6. The Petition is disposed of in above terms.
[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]
3
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.