2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 351207
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE G. S. KULKARNI
HON'BLE JUSTICE KAMAL KHATA
SAMEER SUBHASH PATIL – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. – Respondent
WP/1658/2012
Ashwini IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1658 OF 2012 WITH NOTICE OF MOTION NO.180 OF 2016 Sameer Subhash Patil ] Applicant Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and others ] Respondents a/w WRIT PETITION NO.547 OF 2017 a/w INTERIM APPLICATION [L] NO.14400 OF 2023 a/w INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1769 OF 2022 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.1658 OF 2012 a/w NOTICE OF MOTION NO.1 OF 2021 a/w NOTICE OF MOTION NO.439 OF 2019 a/w INTERIM APPLICATION NO.928 OF 2020 a/w INTERIM APPLICATION NO.2782 OF 2022 a/w NOTICE OF MOTION NO.5 OF 2021 a/w REVIEW PETITION [L] NO.72 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1658 OF 2012 a/w Digitally signed by CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.105 OF 2018 ASHWINI H ASHWINI GAJAKOSH H a/w GAJAKOSH Date:
2025.07.25
18:27:05 NOTICE OF MOTION NO.188 OF 2013 +0530 a/w NOTICE OF MOTION NO.6 OF 2021 a/w NOTICE OF MOTION NO.501 OF 2017 a/w NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4 OF 2021 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1658 OF 2012 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.183 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.186 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.55 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.58 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.69 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.50 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.3683 OF 2018 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.3686 OF 2018 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.92 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.290 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.275 OF 2019 a/w INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4506 OF 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO.275 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.46 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.35 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.81 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.30 OF 2019 a/w WRIT PETITION NO.45 OF 2019 …..
Mr. Sanjiv Sawant a/w Mr. Heramb Kadam, Ms. Samiksha S. Mane i/b Sandeep Bane a/w Ms. Pooja Bane, Mr. Atharva Bane and Ms. Shefali Jadhav for Petitioner in WP/1658/2012.
Mr. Shubham Bane i/b Sandeep Bane, Ms. Pooja Bane, Mr. Atharva Bane, Ms. Shefali Jadhav for Petitioner in other Petitions.
Mr. J. M. D’Silva a/w V. N. Gupta for Petitioner in WP/547/2017.
Mr. Mahendra Agvekar a/w Ms. Shraddha Chavan for Intervenor/Applicant in IA/928/2020 in WP/1658/2012.
Mr. P. G. Lad a/w Ms. Aparna Kalathil and Ms. Anjali Maskar for MHADA.
Mr. G.S. Godbole, Senior Advocate, a/w Mr. Chaitnya Chavan, Ms. Pushpa Yadav i/b Ms. Komal Punjabi for BMC in WP/1658/2012 and WP/547/2017.
Mr. Jitendra Khonde, Executive Engineer, Building Proposal Dept. present. Mr. Sadipkumar Wagh, Assistant Engineer, Building Proposal Dept. present. Mr. Kshitijkumar Varma, Section Engineer, Building Proposal Dept. present.
Mr. Shanker Dhumander, Assistant Engineer, Building Proposal Dept. present.
Mr. Vilas Khilari, Deputy, H.E. City, present.
Mr. Kailash Dhongade, Assistant Engineer, Water Works Department present.
Ms. Uma Palsuledesai, AGP for State in WP/1658/2012, 183/2019, 55/2019, 58/2019 and 45/2019.
Mr. Atul Vanarse, AGP for State in WP/547/2017.
Ms. Jyoti Chavan, Adl. GP for State in WP/186/2019, 275/2019 and 81/2019.
Mr. Milind More, Addl. GP for State in WP/69/2019 and WP/92/2019.
Ms. Nazia Sheikh, AGP for State in WP/50/2019.
Ms. Poonam Mittal, AGP for State in WP/3686/2018.
Ms. Fatima Lakadawala, AGP for State in WP/3683/2018.
Mr. Dipesh Siroya, AGP for State in WP/290/2019. Ms. Manisha Gawde, AGP for State in WP/46/2019.
Ms. Usha Rahi, AGP for State in WP/30/2019.
…..
CORAM : G.S. KULKARNI &
KAMAL KHATA, J.J.
DATE : 25th JULY, 2025.
Oral Order (Per G.S. Kulkarni, J.)
1. This batch of proceedings has raised very serious concerns in regard to the several illegalities in regard to a skeleton structure of ten floors in the heart of busy commercial area in Mumbai city, namely, at Dadar. To the dismay of everyone, the twelve ground floor premises are occupied by the tenants, who are running full-fledged commercial establishments/shops, however, without any approval from the Municipal Corporation and an Occupation Certificate. In a detailed order passed by this Court on 16th July, 2025 (Coram: one of us G.S. Kulkarni and Arif S. Doctor, JJ), several illegalities are noted, which would certainly shock the conscience of the Court. This, more particularly considering that 110 res