S JO M H I2 N TA0 SO 2 N 6:BHD JO ig HCit N a S ll O y- N sAi g G n O eSN d S b A y: L S4V M E I9S TA0-DB GONSALVES D 00 a : t 5 e 5 : : 2 0 0 5 2 + 6. 0 0 5 1 3 .0 0 8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1660 OF 2021 Manoj Dattu Korade … Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra (through The Secretary Urban Development Dept. And Ors. … Respondents ----

Mr Laxman Deshmukh, for the petitioner.

Mr NC Walimbe, Addl GP, a/w. Smt VR Date, AGP, for respondent Nos. 1, 4 and 5/State.

Mr Yogesh Vijay Patil, for respondent No.2/Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation.

Mr Jayant Bardeskar, for respondent No.6.

----

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE AND R.N. LADDHA, JJ.

DATE: 6th JANUARY, 2026 P.C.:

1. The writ petition filed by the petitioner seek two-fold reliefs; firstly, it seek a declaration as regards the respondent No.6 having disqualified as a Councillor of the Municipal Corporation in terms of sub-section (1D) of Section 10 of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949, and secondly, it seek direction to the Corporation to demolish the unauthorised and/or illegal structure constructed by the respondent No.6 at Parmar Chawl, City Survey No.18607, Block No.521, Ambikar Nagar, Station Road, Ulhasnagar, within stipulated period.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner fairly concede that the term of the respondent No.6 as a Councillor having already expired, she being elected in the year 2017, the relief sought in prayer clause (A)(ii) do not survive.

3. However, according to the learned Counsel, his grievance as regards the illegal structure of respondent No.6 standing on site still continue, and he request a direction to the Corporation to demolish the said structure.

4. On hearing the learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, we can only observe that if any structure is unauthorised or is illegal, the Corporation is duty bound to take an action, and therefore, we direct the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the Municipal Commissioner of the Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation, if his grievance as regards the said structure constructed by respondent No.6 still subsist and the structure still continue to stand. Upon such representation being made, the Municipal Commissioner shall immediately look into the same, and if it is found to be illegal, it shall be followed by appropriate action.

5. The Counsel for the respondent No.6 raises a serious dispute claiming ownership of the structure, and hence it is clarified that, in any event, if the structure is found to be unauthorised or illegal, we expect the respondent Corporation to initiate action against the owner of the said structure.

With this direction the petition stands disposed off.

(R.N. LADDHA, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)