IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION 122 OF 2010 Anil Narayan Joshi and Ors. … Petitioner Versus The Secretary, Urban Development Department and Ors. … Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO. 40778 OF 2025 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION 122 OF 2010 Sanjay Pralhad More and Ors. … Applicants Versus Anil Narayan Joshi and Ors. … Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION IN PIL NO. 125 OF 2015 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION 122 OF 2010 Anil Narayan Joshi and Ors. … Applicants Versus The Secretary, Urban Development Department and Ors. … Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION IN PIL NO. 78 OF 2014 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION 122 OF 2010 Mr. Kishor Tatyarao Divekar and Ors. … Applicants Versus The Secretary, Urban Development Department … Respondents -----

Mr. Shriram Kulkarni for the Petitioners.

Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Addl. G. P. a/w Mrs. G. R. Raghuwanshi, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5 and 7-State.

Mr. R. S. Apte, Sr. Advocate i/b Mr. Mandar Limaye for the Respondent No.6.

-----

CORAM : REVATI MOHITE DERE &

SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 24 ^th DECEMBER, 2025.

P .C . :

1. The present Public Interest Litigation is filed by the Petitioners seeking directions to the Respondents to remove the encroachment on the land which is reserved as forest in the sanctioned development plan. This Court [Coram : J. N. Patel, Actg.C.J. & S. C. Dharmadhikari, J.) on 17.06.2020 had issued notices in the captioned PIL. Thereafter, the Respondents appeared in the matter. On 07.04.2014, this Court [Coram : A. S.

Oka & A.A. Sayed, JJ.] were pleased to pass the following order:

“1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners, the learned AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 5 and 7 and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No.6. By filing this PIL, the Petitioners have invited the attention of the Court to the fact that on certain State Government lands, encroachments have been made and it is pointed out that the hutments have come up very fast right from the year 2007 on the said lands. Reliance is placed on a representation made by the first Petitioner to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this Court. Reliance is also placed on the representations made by the Petitioners to various authorities including the Collector as well as the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of the City of Thane. On 8th November, 2010, on the basis of the letter addressed by the first Petitioner to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, the Deputy Registrar of this Court called upon the District Collector to submit a report. On the basis of the said letter, on 23rd January, 2010, the District Collector addressed a letter to the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation stating that the Municipal Corporation will have to exercise powers under Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short "the MRTP Act") to remove the encroachments. In the said letter, the Collector stated that the provisions of the MRTP Act make no distinction between a private land and a land held by the State Government.

2. There is a reply filed by the Assistant Municipal Commissioner on 16th October, 2010 in this Petition stating that the Municipal Corporation has repeatedly written to the Collector and to the Tahsildar to take action but so far no steps have been taken by the officers of the State Government. In the affidavit, it is stated that the Municipal Commissioner was willing to extend co-

operation to the State Government Officers.

3. We must note here that the grievance made in the Petition is in relation to the lands bearing Survey No.139/1 of Village Kavesar, Survey No.271 of Village Kavesar and Survey No.285/2 of Village Kolshet. The 7/12 extracts of the said lands have been annexed to the Petition which show that in the cultivation column, the name of the Government of Maharashtra appears and the said lands have been described as Gurcharan lands. The area of the lands as appearing from the 7/12 extracts is 3.76.05 Hectares,