Mohammed Salim Abdul Qudus Chaudhary v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And ORS
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1576 OF 2025 Shahajahan Abulkalam Chaudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1578 OF 2025 Khursheed Ahmed Ruhullah Kureshi WRIT PETITION NO. 1579 OF 2025 Nijamuddin Maqubul Chaudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1581 OF 2025 Mohammad Ismil Mansuri WRIT PETITION NO. 1584 OF 2025 Rahul Udaypal Yadav WRIT PETITION NO. 1586 OF 2025 Abdur Raheman M. Khan 1/10
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc WRIT PETITION NO. 1588 OF 2025 Niyaz Ahmed Rafatullah Chaudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1589 OF 2025 Iliyas Abdulmajid Choudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1591 OF 2025 Israil Samiullah Shaikh WRIT PETITION NO. 1592 OF 2025 Udaypal Mahadev Yadav The State Of Maharashtra & Ors WRIT PETITION NO. 1593 OF 2025 Mohammed Salim Abdul Qudus Chaudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1594 OF 2025 Imran Salim Memon 2/10
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc WRIT PETITION NO. 1705 OF 2025 Muktar Rajjak Qureshi WRIT PETITION NO. 1706 OF 2025 Najma Rafik Choaudhari WRIT PETITION NO. 1916 OF 2025 Abdul Mateen Mohammedumer Shaikh WRIT PETITION NO. 1923 OF 2025 Mohammed Aqeel Mohammed Yusuf Chaudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1924 OF 2025 Waquar Ahmed Chaudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1939 OF 2025 Mohammadhusain Bhikulla Shah The State Of Maharashtra & Ors 3/10
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc WRIT PETITION NO. 1940 OF 2025 Abdulwahid Hidisulla Khan WRIT PETITION NO. 1941 OF 2025 Abdul Moeed Choudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1942 OF 2025 Mohammed Irfan Mohammed Rafique Khan WRIT PETITION NO. 1943 OF 2025 Choudhary Mohammed Vakil Mohammed Yusuf WRIT PETITION NO. 1944 OF 2025 Mohammed Aqeel Mohammed Yusuf Chaudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1945 OF 2025 Ashfaquahmed Nisarahmed Chaudhary 4/10
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc WRIT PETITION NO. 1946 OF 2025 Chaudhary Mohammed Vakil Mohammed Yusuf WRIT PETITION NO. 1947 OF 2025 Mohhamed Waseem Mahibullah Chaudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1948 OF 2025 Firoz Ahmed Shamsullah Choudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 1949 OF 2025 Ashok Kumar Guliram Gupta WRIT PETITION NO. 1950 OF 2025 Khan Shahanshah Mutafa WRIT PETITION NO. 1952 OF 2025 Mohd Shafeek Mohd Yusuf Choudhary 5/10
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc WRIT PETITION NO. 2093 OF 2025 Ruksana Ashad Choudhary WRIT PETITION NO. 2094 OF 2025 Ansari Hafizurrehman Mohammed Shahid WRIT PETITION NO. 2095 OF 2025 Ishrat Ali Izar Ali Shaikh The State Of Maharashtra & Ors WRIT PETITION NO. 2096 OF 2025 Zakariya Umar Memon WRIT PETITION NO. 2097 OF 2025 Isaque Usman Pathan WRIT PETITION NO. 2098 OF 2025 Mohammad Anwar Khan 6/10
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc _______________________________________ Adv. Sahil D. Choudhari for Petitioner(s) in all Petitions. Adv. Kedar B. Dighe for Respondent- PCMC in all Petitions. Adv. R.M. Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent-State in WP/1576/2025, WP/1584/2025, 1588/2025, WP/1705/2025, 1916/2025, WP/1949/2025 and WP/2094/2025.
Adv. M. P. Thakur, A.G.P. for Respondent-State in WP/1578/2025, WP/1942/2025, WP/1943/2025 and WP/1944/2025. Adv. Leena Patil, A.G.P. for Respondent-State in WP/1594/2025. Adv. Dhruti Kapadia, A.G.P for Respondent-State in WP/1581/2025. Adv. Tanu N. Bhatia, A.G.P. for Respondent-State in WP/1586/2025, WP/1924/2025, WP/1947/2025, WP/1952/2025 and WP/2097/2025. Adv. Snehal S. Jadhav, A.G.P for Respondent-State in WP/1579/2025, WP/1592/2025, WP/1706/2025, WP/1940/2025, WP/1941/2025, WP/1948/2025, WP/1950/2025 and WP/2098/2025.
Adv. P. V. Nelson Rajan, A.G.P. for Respondent-State in WP/1589/2025, WP/1939/2025, WP/1945/2025 and WP/2095/2025.
Adv. A.A. Alaspurkar, A.G.P. for Respondent-State in WP/1591/2025, WP/1593/2025, WP/1923/2025, WP/1946/2025, WP/2093/2025 and WP/2096/2025.
_______________________________________ CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ.
DATE : 13th February 2025.
P.C. :
1) It is an admitted fact on record that, the Petitioner's structures are thoroughly illegal and erected in contravention of all the laws of the land. There is no approval or sanction accorded by any competent authority/planning authority for erecting suit structures. 2) Learned Advocates for the Respondents pointed out the fact that on an earlier occasion a demolition drive was scheduled on 30th January, 2025 with the aid of necessary police protection. However, all of a sudden a 7/10
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc humongous mob gathered at the area of the suit structures and indulge into 'Rasta Roko Abhiyan', thereby halting vehicular traffic on the highway for about four hours.
2.1) It appears to us that the Petitioners have more faith in adopting extra constitutional measures than the constitutional remedies. 3) Be that as it may as the suit structures mentioned in the Petitions are thoroughly unauthorized and illegal structures. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajendra Kumar Barjatya and Anr. V/s. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad and Others reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3767 in paragraph 20 has held as under:
"20. In the ultimate analysis, we are of the opinion that construction (s) put up in violation of or deviation from the building plan approved by the local authority and the constructions which are audaciously put up without any building planning approval, cannot be encouraged. Each and every construction must be made scrupulously following and strictly adhering to the Rules. In the event of any violation being brought to the notice of the Courts, it has to be curtailed with iron hands and any lenience afforded to them would amount to showing misplaced sympathy. Delay in directing rectification of illegalities, administrative failure, regulatory inefficiency, cost of construction and investment, negligence and laxity on the part of the authorities concerned in performing their obligation(s) under the Act, cannot be used as a shield to defend action taken against the 8/10
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc illegal/unauthorized constructions. That apart, the State Governments often seek to enrich themselves through the process of regularization by condoning/ratifying the violations and illegalities. The State is unmindful that this gain is insignificant compared to the long-term damage it causes to the orderly urban development and irreversible adverse impact on the environment. Hence, regularization schemes must be brought out only in exceptional circumstances and as a onetime measure for residential houses after a detailed survey and considering the nature of land, fertility, usage, impact on the environment, availability and distribution of resources, proximity to water bodies/rivers and larger public interest.
Unauthorized constructions, apart from posing a threat to the life of the occupants and the citizens living nearby, also have an effect on resources like electricity, ground water and access to roads, which are primarily designed to be made available in orderly development and authorized activities. Master plan or the zonal development cannot be just individual centric but also must be devised keeping in mind the larger interest of the public and the environment. Unless the administration is streamlined and the persons entrusted with the implementation of the act are held accountable for their failure in performing statutory obligations, violations of this nature would go unchecked and become more rampant.
If the officials are let scot-free, they will be emboldened and would continue to turn a nelson's eye to all the illegalities resulting in derailment of all planned projects and pollution, disorderly traffic, security risks, etc."
dtg wp-as- sr no.62 to 75 and 77 to 98.doc 4) As the suit structures in the present Petitions are thoroughly illegal and unauthorized structures, we are not inclined to exercise our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to protect them. 5) Petitions are accordingly dismissed.
( SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. ) 10/10