Sayed Anam Sayed Babu v. Nanded Waghala Municipal Corporation And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:34024 1 988 WP 4346-2022.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 988 WRIT PETITION NO. 4346 OF 2022 SAYED ANAM SAYED BABU

VERSUS

NANDED WAGHALA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS ...

Mr. Pratap P. Mandlik - Advocate for Petitioner Mr. R.K. Ingole - Patil - Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr. U.B. Bilolikar - Advocate for Respondent No.3 ...

CORAM

: SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.

DATE :

03.12.2025 PER COURT :

1.

Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties. 2.

The petitioner challenges the order dated 07.12.2021 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Nanded, in Regular Civil Appeal No.129/2018, arising out of the order dated 06.05.2016 passed by the Municipal Commissioner of Nanded Waghala Municipal Corporation in Case No.JaVaMa/1622/616.

3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that by the said order, the learned Municipal Commissioner, without issuing notice to the present petitioner and without affording him an opportunity of hearing, erroneously directed respondent No.2, occupant of Shop No.23, Late Rajiv Gandhi Market, New Mondha, Nanded, to vacate the said shop.

2 988 WP 4346-2022.odt 4.

Learned Counsel for respondent No.3 submits that pursuant to the order passed by the competent authority, possession of the shop was taken over by the Municipal Corporation and thereafter the same was put to auction by following due procedure. It is submitted that during the pendency of the proceedings, further consequential steps have already been taken in accordance with law.

5.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstance, I am not inclined to entertain the present petition. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed.

6.

No order as to costs.

[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE Pooja Kale/