Bombay High Court
Mohan Raghunath Jadhav And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra Throu. Forest … on 26 May, 2026
1
502-WP-2099-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2099 OF 2026
Santosh Nigappa Burje ....Petitioner
VERSUS
Sadanand Ashok Kulkarni and Ors. ....Respondents
-----
Ms. Radhika Kurdukar (Through VC) a/w Mr. Rahul Patil i/b Mr.
Yuvraj Narvankar, for Petitioner.
Ms. S. N. Deshmukh, AGP, for the Respondent-State.
-----
Digitally
signed by
SHANTANU
SHANTANU SHANKARSA
SHANKARSA DHUDUM
CORAM : RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.
DHUDUM Date:
2026.05.26
17:21:53
+0530 DATE : 26th MAY, 2026.
(VACATION COURT)
P.C.
1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned AGP
for the Respondent-State.
2. By the present petition, the Petitioner seeks to challenge the
notice dated 25th May, 2026, whereby Respondent Nos.3 and 4
propose to demolish the alleged unauthorized structure situated at
Ward No.4, CTS No.405, House No.111, 111/1 Mali Master Wada,
Behind Ghorpade Natyagurh, Ichalkaranji, District: Kolhapur, on the
ground that the said structure is illegal and unauthorized.
Shantanu S. Dhudum
::: Uploaded on – 26/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 26/05/2026 21:13:07 :::
2
502-WP-2099-2026.DOC
3. Learned advocate for the Petitioner submits that by the
notice dated 25th May, 2026, the Petitioner has been given 24 hours’
time to vacate the said structure/premises. She further submitted that
as early as 17th October, 2024, the Petitioner had filed an application
seeking regularization of an unauthorized portion admeasuring 2.5 ft.
X 22 ft i.e. approximately 55 sq. ft. She further submitted that, except
55 sq. ft. portion, the entire structure is legal and duly authorized.
She further submitted that the construction permission in respect of
the remaining structure was granted vide order dated 24 th December,
2019.
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner further places reliance
upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Writ Petition (Civil)
No.295 of 2022 with Writ Petition (Criminal) No.162 of 2022 and
Writ Petition (Civil) No.328 of 2022 vide judgment dated 13 th
November, 2024, wherein the directions have been issued under
Article 142 of the Constitution of India governing the procedure to be
followed by authorities while carrying out demolition except in cases
involving unauthorized structures situated on public roads, streets,
footpaths, abutting railway lines, river bodies, water bodies, or where
demolition is pursuant to an order passed by a Court of law.
5. She further submits that, in the present case, there is no
order of demolition passed by any Court of law and, more
Shantanu S. Dhudum
::: Uploaded on – 26/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 26/05/2026 21:13:07 :::
3
502-WP-2099-2026.DOC
importantly, in view of the pending application for regularization, the
impugned demolition notice ought not to have been issued without
first considering the said application.
6. Though served, Respondent Nos.3 and 4 have not appeared.
7. The Petitioner is directed to file an affidavit of service. The
Petitioner shall once again inform Respondent Nos.3 and 4 about the
present petition and the next date of hearing.
8. Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the
Petitioner and the facts that the subject premises is a residential
house, and further considering that only an area admeasuring
approximately 55 sq. ft. is allegedly constructed without permission,
in respect of which an application for regularization has already been
filed and is pending consideration, there shall be ad-interim stay in
terms of prayer clause (b) till the next date of hearing.
9. Stand over to 28th May, 2026.
( RANJITSINHA RAJA BHONSALE, J.)
Shantanu S. Dhudum
::: Uploaded on – 26/05/2026 ::: Downloaded on – 26/05/2026 21:13:07 :::
