-- 1 -- WP 2660.2025 (J).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2660 OF 2025 Sunita wd/o Tikeshwar Shivankar Age : 53 yrs, Occ. : Agriculture R/o : At Pimpalgaon, Tal. : Lakhni, Dist. : Bhandara .. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Maharashtra Through the Collector Bhandara, O/a : Collectorate, Trimurti Square, Bhandara – 441904 2. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Bhandara, O/a : Near Police Campus, NH-6, Bhandara – 441904 3. The Deputy Engineer, Public Works Department, Subdivision, Sakoli O/a : Near Rest House, Sakoli, Tah. : Sakoli, Dist. : Bhandara .. Respondents 4. The Tahsildar Lakhni O/a : Near Gandhi Vidyalaya NH-6, Lakhni, Tal : Lakhni, Dist.: Bhandara 5. The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Lakhni O/a : Samarth Nagar, NH-6, Lakhni, Tal : Lakhni, Dist.: Bhandara 6. The Gram Panchayat Gurdha Through its Secretary, At & Post : Gurdha, Tal : Lakhni, Dist. : Bhandara 7. Shri Kishor s/o Narayan Meshram At & Post : Gurdha, Tal : Lakhni, Dist. : Bhandara PAGE 1 OF 8 2026:BHC-NAG:11141-DB -- 2 -- WP 2660.2025 (J).doc WITH CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 173 OF 2025 Sunita wd/o Tikeshwar Shivankar Age : 53 yrs, Occ. : Agriculture R/o : At Pimpalgaon, Tal. : Lakhni, Dist. : Bhandara .. Petitioner Versus 1. Dr. Sanjay Kolte; The Collector Bhandara, O/a : Collectorate, Trimurti Square, Bhandara – 441904 2. Shri. Parag Thamke; The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Bhandara, O/a : Near Police Campus, NH-6, Bhandara – 441904 3. Shri. Dindayal Matale; The Deputy Engineer, Public Works Department, Subdivision, Sakoli, O/a : Near Rest House, Sakoli, Tah. : Sakoli, Dist. : Bhandara .. Respondents 4. Shri. Dhananjay Deshmukh, The Tahsildar Lakhni O/a : Near Gandhi Vidyalaya NH-6, Lakhni, Tal : Lakhni, Dist.: Bhandara 5. Shri Sandeep Pantaone; The Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Lakhni O/a : Samarth Nagar, NH-6, Lakhni, Tal : Lakhni, Dist.: Bhandara 6. Shri. Piyush Navkhare, Secretary, The Gram Panchayat Gurdha At & Post : Gurdha, Tal : Lakhni, Dist. : Bhandara 7. Shri Kishor s/o Narayan Meshram At & Post : Gurdha, Tal : Lakhni, Dist. : Bhandara PAGE 2 OF 8 -- 3 -- WP 2660.2025 (J).doc --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Anish A. Kathane Advocate for petitioner. Mr. A.J.Gohokar, A.G.P. for respondent/State. Mr. Niwrutti Meshram, Advocate for respondent No.6. Mr. Pravin D. Ganvir, Advocate for respondent No.7. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJNISH R. VYAS, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 24, 2026 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.) (1) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties. (2) The petitioner has approached this Court praying for direction to respondent Nos.1 to 6 to take the action to remove encroachment made by respondent No.7 upon Survey No.16. Various other prayers including challenging action of issuing ‘Malmatta Patrak’, sanctioning of funds from ‘Gharkul Yojana’ are also made. (3) The petitioner claims that she is owner and possessor of an undivided share in agricultural land bearing Survey No.13. According to the petitioner, as there is a State Highway adjacent to the land of the petitioner and respondent No.7, a building line and a control line are required to be maintained by respondent Nos.2 and 3. The State Highway in the present matter is SH No.361 and building line and control line in rural area is fixed at 37 meters and 50 meters. PAGE 3 OF 8 -- 4 -- WP 2660.2025 (J).doc (4) According to the petitioner, respondent No.7, who owns and possesses land and house property bearing No.268 in village, Gurdha, has occupied portion of Government land from Survey No.16. The said land is adjacent to SH No.361. The petitioner claims that respondent No.7 has earlier encroached upon the Government land and thereafter, recently has carried out further encroachment upon the adjoining portion of the land bearing Survey No.16, which has resulted into obstructing the right of way of the petitioner to access her land bearing Survey No.13. She also submits that even ‘Malmatta Patrak’ was issued in favour of respondent No.7 illegally. (5) According to the petitioner, respondent Nos.5 and 6 i.e. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Lakhni and Gram Panchayat, Gurdha had erroneously and improperly granted sanction under ‘Gharkul Yojana’ to the construction of ‘pakka house’ upon the encroached land by the respondent No.7. In the aforesaid background, the prayers as narrated supra are made by the petitioner. (6) In pursuance with the notice, the respondent authorities have appeared. The respondent Nos.2 and 3 have filed their affidavit in reply dated 16/06/2025 and have contended that from spot inspection, it is revealed that the construction of respondent No.7 does not come in ROW of road i.e. 24 meters road and therefore, it is not possible to remove the construction. It is further submitted that due to PAGE 4 OF 8 -- 5 -- WP 2660.2025 (J).doc construction carried out by the respondent No.7, there is no obstruction to the public road. As regards the sanctioning of illegal funds from ‘Gharkul Yojana’, it was stated that the funds were sanctioned as per the Government norms. (7) The respondent No.5 Block Development Officer has also filed affidavit dated 03/09/2025 and has contended that after conducting the spot inspection of the proposed site for construction, the answering respondent along with respondent No.6 had sanctioned funds out of the ‘Prime Minister Awas/Gharkul Yojana’. (8) The respondent No.7 has also filed its para-wise reply and has submitted that he is in long standing possession of the land in question and since 1997-98 and had deposited fine to the Tahsildar for encroachment. He submitted that the petitioner has absolutely no locus and her grievance is purely private nature. According to respondent No.7 he has already submitted an application dated 26/09/2024 to the Sub-Divisional Officer, Sakoli for allotment of Patta. He further submitted that he would also move an application for regularization of construction before the Competent Authority. (9) With the help of respective counsels, we have gone through the record and given thoughtful consideration to the arguments advanced. PAGE 5 OF 8 -- 6 -- WP 2660.2025 (J).doc (10) The petitioner has come with a case that the construction is illegal, as the same is adjacent to the SH No.361 and falls within ROW of the said State Highway road and is within building line as well as control line of the Highway. A prayer is also made against respondent Nos.5 and 6 regarding the illegal construction of funds from the ‘Gharkul Yojana’. (11) In this regard, when questioned, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a complaint was made to the Sarpanch/Secretary for removal of the encroachment, and that the issue regarding the disbursement of funds under the ‘Gharkul Yojana’ was also raised. (12) As per the stand taken by respondent No.3, respondent No.7 has not sought prior permission from the answering respondent for construction of his house. It is further stated that, though the construction made by respondent No.7 does not fall within the right of way (ROW) of the road, it falls within the building line and control line of the State Highway and, therefore, it is not possible to remove the construction as prayed for. The Block Development Officer has come with a case that the funds in question were sanctioned only after conducting the spot inspection of the proposed site. Further the stand taken by the respondent No.7 reveals that he has already made an application before the Sub-Divisional Officer and prayed for allotment of PAGE 6 OF 8 -- 7 -- WP 2660.2025 (J).doc Patta. He has also submitted that, he would prefer an appropriate application for regularization. (13) In the aforesaid background, since the issue of regularisation of the construction and allotment of Patta to respondent No.7 can be decided by the competent authorities, so also the issues raised by the petitioner regarding removal of the illegal construction and alleged illegal grant of benefits under the ‘Gharkul Yojana’, we find that, in the interest of justice, the petition can be disposed of with certain directions. Accordingly the petition is disposed of in the following terms : 1. The petitioner is at liberty to prefer an appropriate application to respondent Nos.5 and 6 regarding illegal sanction of funds from the ‘Gharkul Yojana’ upon the Survey No.16 Mouza : Gurdha, Tah. : Lakhni, Dist. : Bhandara. 2. As regards the prayer for direction to the respondents to initiate immediate action to remove encroachment made by respondent No.7, same shall be dealt with, once the issue regarding allotment of Patta and regularization of construction is decided by the Competent Authorities, in accordance with law and after granting an opportunity of being heard to the affected parties, within a period of 12 weeks from the receipt of this order. 3. The respondent No.7 can make an appropriate application for regularization of construction and allotment of Patta before the Competent Authority, within a period of 02 weeks from today. PAGE 7 OF 8 -- 8 -- WP 2660.2025 (J).doc 4. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of. 5. As the writ petition is disposed of, we do not find any propriety in continuing the Contempt Petition No.173/2025, which alleges contempt of the interim order passed by this Court. Hence, the Contempt Petition is also disposed of. [ RAJNISH R. VYAS, J. ] [ ANIL S. KILOR J.] KOLHE PAGE 8 OF 8 Signed by: Mr. Ravikant Kolhe Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 27/08/2026 16:28:01