Bombay High Court · 2025-12-05
CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (MAHARASHTRA) LTD vs DEEPAK D. PATIL AND ORS
- Citation / case number
- WP/5063/2012
- Court
- Bombay High Court
- Petitioner
- CITY AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (MAHARASHTRA) LTD
- Respondent
- DEEPAK D. PATIL AND ORS
Judgment text excerpt
wp5063-2012-J.doc AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5063 OF 2012 City and Industrial Development Corporation (Maharashtra) Limited, having it’s office at CIDCO Bhavan, C.B.D. Belapur, New Bombay 400 614 … Petitioner V/s. 1. Deepak D. Patil 2. Kamalakar D. Mhatre ATUL 3. Girish S. Thaku GANESH 4. Sunil L. Mahtre KULKARNI Digitally signed by ATUL GANESH 5. Vinod A. Mhatre KULKARNI Date: 2025.12.05 11:32:06 +0530 6. Sandeep S. Tandel 7. Pritam J. Mhatre 8. Kuldeep E. Mhatre 9. Rajaram M. Mhatre 10. Santosh G. Thakur 11. Sameer B. Mahtre, 12. Pravin G. Thakur 13. Kiran M. Bhoir, 14. Arvind G. Khanavkar 15. Amol R. Dalvi 16. Jogendra Y. Koli 17. Nilesh M. Kadu 18. Ganesh H. Bhoir 19. Devendra J. Mhatre 20. Swapnil R. Patil 21. Bhushan S. Patil 22. Sameer V. Bhoir 23. Nilesh J. Madhavi 24. Gurunath R. Tandel 25. Bhagirath D. Patil 1 wp5063-2012-J.doc 26. Umesh M. Patil 27. Sandeep P. Gaikwad 28. Santosh M. Patil 29. Rakesh D. Koli 30. Rajendra S. Koli All having address at C.o. Kalamboli Fire Station, At & Post Kalamboli, Taluka Panvelm District Raigad. 31. Panvel Municipal Corporation, Swamy Nityanand Road, Opp. Gokhale Marriage Hall, Old Panvel, Navi Mumbai 410 206 32. The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai … Respondents Mr. G.S. Hegde, Senior Advocate with Ms. P.M. Bhansali i/by D.S.K. Legal for the petitioner-CIDCO. Ms. Vaishali K. Jagdale with Mr. Yash K. Jagdale for respondent Nos.1 to 30. Mr. V.P. Vaidya with Mr. Jagdish G. Aradwad (Reddy) & Mr. Abhijit Patil for respondent No.31. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. RESERVED ON : NOVEMBER 21, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON : DECEMBER 5, 2025 JUDGMENT: 1. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles