Devanand Sakharam Satpute And ORS v. State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Principal Secretary And ORS
9-WP.17499.2025.doc JVS.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 17499 OF 2025 Devanand Sakharam Satpute & Ors.
} Petitioners
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
} Respondents Mr. Abhijit B. Kadam, Advocate for the Petitioners. Ms. Neha S. Bhide, Government Pleader with Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Additional Government Pleader and Ms. G. R. Raghuwanshi, AGP for State.
CORAM:
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, CJ. & GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE:
5th JANUARY 2026 P.C.:
Challenging the order dated 30th September 2025, four persons claiming themselves to be the residents of village Nhayale Budruk, Taluka Javhar, District Palghar have approached this Court seeking the following reliefs :- "a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the record and proceedings from the Office of Respondents;
b) This Hon'ble Court after going through the record and proceedings be pleased to issued writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari and be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned Order dated 30.09.2025 passed by Respondent No. 3 in Proceeding No. Palghar ZP/GP/Off-5/ Vashi/438/2025 and further be pleased to grant permission as per Technical Grant dated 7.08.2024 and Administrative Grant dated 20.08.2024 and technically work permission of August, 2024 bearing No. 47/219/August, 2024 more particularly issued by Executive Engineer, Zilla Parishad Works Department, Javhar granting permission for construction of Grarm Panchayat Office of village Nhayale Budruk;
c) This Hon'ble Court after going through the record and proceedings be pleased to take action against Respondent No. 6
9-WP.17499.2025.doc Gramvikas Adhikari Nyahale Budruk and Respondent No. 7 Sarpanch Grampanchayat Nyahale Budruk for issuing E Tender notice on 21.09.2024 without any order from higher Authority." 2.
Mr. Abhijit B. Kadam, the learned counsel for the petitioners states that a prior decision taken by the Gram Panchayat has been changed only because the new Sarpanch has come into power. 3.
The learned counsel for the petitioners states that a decision was taken for construction of the Gram Panchayat office at village Nhayale Budruk in the meeting of the Gram Panchayat. According to the petitioners, by changing the place, the Sarpanch has violated certain rules and now 15 Gram Panchayat offices and other health services would be affected.
4.
The learned counsel for the petitioners seeks adjournment for producing the reports to contradict the decision dated 30th September 2025.
5.
However, we have declined the request for adjournment for producing the reports. If the petitioners have any grievance or dispute regarding the meeting of Gram Panchayat, their remedy shall lie elsewhere and such dispute cannot be decided in a writ proceeding. The decision dated 30th September 2025 has the support of duly elected Gram Panchayat and to such a decision, no interference is permissible on the ground that some inconvenience shall be caused to the villagers.
6.
Writ Petition No. 17499 of 2025 is dismissed. Digitally signed by JAYANT VISHWANATH SALUNKE Date:
2026.01.12 11:19:04 +0530 JAYANT VISHWANATH SALUNKE [GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]