Galina Consultancy Services Private Limited And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Dept And ORS
Rekha Patil
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13435 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 17272 OF 2024 Galina Consultancy Services Private Limited And Ors.
...Applicants
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Galina Consultancy Services Private Limited And Ors.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
...Respondents
Mr. A. A. Kumbhakoni, Senior Advocate a/w Pramod Patil, Atharv Deshmukh i/b PNP Associates, for the Applicants/Petitioners. Ms. Ashwini A. Purav, AGP, for the Respondent-State. Ms. Anjali S. Kolapkar, for the Respondent No. 2-PMRDA.
CORAM:
SUMAN SHYAM & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.
DATED:
27TH NOVEMBER, 2025.
PC:- 1.
Mr. Kumbhakoni, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Writ Petitioners/Applicants, submits that notwithstanding the successive orders passed by this Court directing the Collector to take a decision on the Application submitted by the Petitioners for conversion of the land, no action has been taken in the matter till today. Hence, further direction of this Court has been sought by the Petitioners.
REKHA PRAKASH PATIL REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Date: 2025.11.28 10:55:37 +0530
2.
After going through the records, we find that there are clear and categorical directions issued by this Court on 24th April, 2025 and thereafter, again on 28th July, 2025, requiring the Collector i.e. the Respondent No. 3, to take a decision in the matter within the time frame indicated in the order. Notwithstanding the same, no such decision has been taken till today.
3.
Ms. Purav, learned AGP appearing for the Respondent-State, has produced a copy of the Communication dated 3rd October, 2025, a perusal of which goes to show that after the High Court has issued a categorical direction, as noted above, the Collector is now delaying the decision by taking a stand that the opinion of the Charity Commissioner has been sought. This, in our considered opinion, is contumacious and has the effect of undermining the majesty of this Court. Be that as it may, on the request of learned AGP, we grant four weeks' further time to the Collector/Respondent No.3 to take appropriate decision in the matter, in compliance of this Court's directive, as noted above and communicate the same to the Petitioners.
4.
We make it clear that if for any reason whatsoever, the order of the Court is not complied with, within the next four weeks, the Respondent No.3 i.e. the Collector, Pune, shall remain personally present before this Court, on the next date fixed alongwith the relevant records so as to answer the queries of the Court. 5.
Office to list this matter again on 19th January, 2026. High on Board.
6.
We further make it clear that in order to comply with the Court's order, it will be open for the Collector to seek additional documents / clarification from the Petitioner if so required, without, however, compromising with the timeline, as laid down, in this order.
7.
A copy of this order be furnished to the learned AGP for necessary communication.
( M.M. SATHAYE, J.) (SUMAN SHYAM, J.) {