Kabristan Muslim Sanstha Karanje Through Chairman Bashir Ali Mulani v. Vishal Pralhad Pawar (Representing Karanje Gramastha)

924-RPW-ST-30685-2025.doc Shailaja

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION [STAMP] NO.30685 OF 2025 a/w INTERIM APPLICATION NO.11240 OF 2025 IN REVIEW PETITION [STAMP] NO.30685 OF 2025 Kabrasthan Muslim Sanstha Karanje through ] Its Chairman Mr. Jamir Samsher Shaikh ] Petitioner

IN THE MATTER OF:

Vishal Prahlad Pawar (Representing ] Karanje Gramastha) ] Petitioner

Versus

The Chief Officer, Municipal Council ] Kesarkarpeth Satara and others ] Respondents .....

Mr. S.B. Talekar (through V.C.) a/w Mr. Saurabh Veer i/b Talekar & Associates, for Petitioner.

Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel, A.G.P, for Respondent - State. .....

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK & AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.

DATE : 27th NOVEMBER, 2025.

P.C:

1.

Heard Mr. Talekar, learned Counsel for the review petitioner. 2.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order passed by this Court virtually amounts to conferring jurisdiction on the Collector. We SHAILAJA SHRIKANT HALKUDE SHRIKANT HALKUDE Date: 2025.11.29 11:47:36 +0530

924-RPW-ST-30685-2025.doc see no substance in such submission. This Court in terms of paragraph 5 (iii) has observed that the Collector or his representative shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the parties and to submit documents in support of their claim. 3.

It is always open for the petitioner to raise an objection to the jurisdiction of the Collector. We do not see any embargo in the order which has been placed on the right of any of the party to raise objection on Collector's jurisdiction to hear the matter in respect of initiating action for removal of encroachment.

4.

No case is made out for interfering with the order in the exercise of review jurisdiction of this Court. We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record in the order passed by this Court which is the subject matter of review. The Review Petition is dismissed.

5.

In view of dismissal of the Review Petition, Interim Application stands disposed of.

[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] [M.S. KARNIK, J.]