Sunil S/O Vinayakrao Chaudhary v. The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Urban Development Dept., Mumbai And Another

2026:BHC-NAG:4142-DB J-wp2018.26.odt 1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No.2018 OF 2026 Sunil s/o Vinayakrao Chaudhary, Aged about 68 years, Occupation- Municipal Corporation Engineer under PMAY-U [CLTC] Project in Amravati Municipal Corporation, Amravati R/O Engineer's Colony, House No.20 Near Ganesh Nagar, Soot Girni Road, Rajapeth, Amravati, Tq. & Dist. Amravati.

: PETITIONER ...VERSUS...

1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.

2. The Commissioner, Amravati Municipal Corporation, Amravati - 444606 : RESPONDENTS =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Mr. V.A. Kothale, Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr. H.D. Futane, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= CORAM : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR AND NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : 09 th MARCH, 2026.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) 1.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

J-wp2018.26.odt 2/3 2.

Issue notice to the respondents.

3.

Mr. H.D. Futane, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice on behalf of respondent No.1. 4.

In view of the order being passed, notice to the respondent No.2 is dispensed with.

5.

Heard learned counsels of both parties.

6.

By taking us through the order of this Court passed on 8th September, 2025 in Writ Petition No.2103/2025 learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a direction was given to the respondent No.1 therein i.e. the Chief Engineer II Prime Minister Housing Scheme/MHADA, Mumbai to decide the letter/application dated 28.11.2022 of the petitioner within four months from today. He further submits that vide communication dated 31.12.2025, said authority i.e. Chief Engineer II Prime Minister Housing Scheme/MHADA, Mumbai has shifted the burden on the present respondent No.2. By reading out the relevant portion, the counsel for the petitioner submits that it is stated in the said communication dated 31.12.2025 if an implementing agency wishes to pay more than amount specified in Central Government Guidelines for CLTC appointment they must bear the additional costs from their own funds. He further submits that in pursuance to the said

J-wp2018.26.odt 3/3 communication he has already made a representation on 2.1.2026 which is still pending with the respondent No.2. 7.

We have perused the order of this Court in earlier round of litigation referred supra and also the representation made by the petitioner on 2nd January, 2026.

8.

In that view of the matter, we dispose of the present petition with direction to the respondent No.2 to decide the said representation dated 2.1.2026 within six months from the date of receipt of the order.

9.

The petitioner to appear before the respondent No.2 on 18th March, 2026 and appraise the said authority of the order of this Court and act in accordance with the directions of the said authority thereafter. The petition is disposed of as such with no order as to costs.

(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) wadode Signed by: Mr. Devendra Wadode Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 12/03/2026 11:56:08