Chitra Sonawane. 60-WP-10463-2025.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10463 OF 2025 Shivdas Dashrath Gaikwad .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO.62 OF 2026 Jitendra Rajaram Mhatre .. Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents. … Mr. Abhishek Kulkarni a/w Sagar Wakale for Petitioners. Mrs. Neha Bhide, GP a/w Mrs. MP Thakur AGP in WP/10463/2026 for Respondent/State. Mrs. AA Purav AGP in WP/62/2026 for Respondent/State. Mr. Kedar B. Dighe for Respondent Nos.2 to 5/KDMC. … CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J. DATE : 10th SEPTEMBER, 2026. P.C. : 1. Heard Mr. Abhishek Kulkarni, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Kedar Dighe, learned Counsel for the Municipal Corporation. With consent of the parties, the captioned Petitions are Disposed Of by this common order. 2. The entire claim is set up on the premise that despite the order dated 10th February 2017 passed by the Respondent/Authority under Section 478 of 1 CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Digitally signed by CHITRA SANJAY SONAWANE Date: 2026.09.13 17:12:43 +0530 Chitra Sonawane. 60-WP-10463-2025.doc the Maharashtra Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 directing demolition of the unauthorised construction within 15 days failing which the Respondent- Authority would undertake demolition and recover the costs from the builders. It is urged before us that until date, the Respondent - Authority has not complied with its own order. Mr. Kulkarni would submit that even though Affidavit of the Corporation is already on record indicating therein certain demolition has been carried out, the same is vague and evasive. Accordingly, it is contended that there is no such impediment to carry out demolition, in terms of the order dated 10th February 2017. 3. Per contra, learned Counsel for the Authority has relied upon counter/objection wherein a categorical stand has been taken that the aggrieved party had instituted a Suit RCS No.240/2022 which is pending consideration and as such demolition order could not be complied with. Be that as it may. As there appears to be no stay of the Trial Court proceedings, at this stage, we are not inclined to keep the matter pending, as there appears to be no such and/or other impediment. 4. In light of the above position, the demolition of unauthorized construction to be carried out strictly in accordance with the law and if necessary, police assistance may be taken. We expect that on an Application by the Corporation to the Competent Police Authorities, they would ensure that Police assistance is duly provided, at the time of carrying out the demolition. 2 Chitra Sonawane. 60-WP-10463-2025.doc This would ally the apprehension expressed by Mr. Dighe. 4. In view of the above, both the Petitions stand Disposed Of. [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE] 3