M/S Rahul Properties, Nagpur, Thr. Its Partner, Gaurav A. Agarwala v. State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Prin. Secretary, Urban Development Dept., Mumbai And ORS.

2026:BHC-NAG:7248-DB 119-WP-3958-26.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 3958 OF 2026 M/s Rahul Properties, Nagpur .Vs.

State of Maharashtra and ors.

_______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr Kartik Shukul, a/by Shri Raghav Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr N. S. Rao, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 4/State. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ.

DATED : 08 th MAY , 2026 .

Heard.

2.

The petitioner has applied to the Competent Authority under Sections 8 (4) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act') for declaration of surplus land. It is the petitioner's contention that he was unable to comply the terms and conditions of the order dated 26.03.2004 passed under Section 20 of the Act within stipulated period, due to unavoidable or uncontrolled reasons. The petitioner has been served with a demand notice for grant of extension for non-compliance of terms and conditions of the said order.

3.

It is the petitioner's contention that he made a representation dated 27.03.2026 to the State Government (page 133), however it has not been decided. Learned Assistant Government Pleader brought to our notice that Government Resolution dated 18.02.2015 has clarified that

119-WP-3958-26.odt the State Government is empowered to exempt the charges on extension in terms of the mechanism provided under G.R. dated 18.11.1992. It reveals that though the petitioner has applied to the State Government, till date no decision has been taken by the respondent no.1 State. Since the State has made a provision for granting exemption in befitting cases, the matter needs to be assessed by the State in terms of G.R. dated 18.11.1992. It is evident that though the petitioner made a representation on 27.03.2026 till date no decision has been taken, hence certain directions are to be issued to that effect.

4.

In view of the above, respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 are directed to decide the petitioner representation dated 27.03.2026 for grant of exemption, within four weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

5.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.

[RAJ D. WAKODE, J] [ANIL S. KILOR, J.] Namrata Signed by: Miss Namrata Suryawanshi Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 08/05/2026 19:41:34