Back
2025 Supreme(Bom) 1454
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ, GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
Pawan Rajaramrao Kadam – Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 6746 of 2024, Writ Petition No. 12870 of 2025, Writ Petition (ST) No. 17210 of 2024, Writ Petition (ST) No. 31132 of 2025
Decided On : 10-12-2025
Advocates Appeared :
For the Appellants : Mayur Khandeparkar, Chinmay Acharya, Kevin Pereira, Balkrishna G. Tangsali, Anil V.Anturkar, Yatin Malvankar, Vaibhav Thorave, Anil Y. Sakhare, A.L. Mirza, Mandar Limaye
For the Respondents : Pravin Samdani, Aqil Khan, Insha Shaikh, Sauda S. Nachan, Afsha Khan, Dawood Khan, Girish Godbole, Rahul Soman, Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, Ashutosh A. Kumbhakoni, Neha Bhide, Shruti D. Vyas, Vaibhav Charalwar, G.R. Raghuwanshi, R.M. Patne, Sameer Patil, Rahul Sinha, Soham Bhalerao, Harshit Tyagi, Prasad S. Dani, Sarang S. Aradhye, Gauri Velankar, Bharat R. Zavberi
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Writ Jurisdiction
Headnote
(B) Administrative Law - Principles of natural justice - Ensuring the right to be heard before decisions affecting rights. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners challenged orders regarding property development and implications on welfare associations in the context of regulatory compliance and rights.
Findings of Court:
The court reserved judgment post-arguments by both petitioners and respondents, indicating ongoing deliberation on critical issues of administrative and regulatory law.
Issues: The primary issue is whether the orders in question adhere to principles of natural justice and appropriate administrative protocols.
Ratio Decidendi: The court will interpret the applicability of procedural fairness in administrative decisions affecting private rights, particularly regarding compliance with statutory regulations.
Result: Judgment reserved for a future date.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conclusion of arguments by parties (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. judgment reserved for decision (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Mr. Pravin Samdani, the learned senior counsel for the respondent-Developer in Writ Petition No.6746 of 2024 has concluded his arguments. Mr. Vijay Kumar Aggarwal, the learned counsel for the respondent no.5-CREDAI-Banm-Raigad Welfare Association adopted the arguments advanced by Mr. Pravin Samdani, the learned senior counsel for the respondent-Developer. Mr. Anil Sakhare, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition (St) No.31132 of 2025 made his submissions.
2. In rejoinder, Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.6746 of 2024 made his brief submissions.
3. The learned counsels for all the parties have concluded their arguments.
4. The judgment is reserved.
