1 20-wp-12754-2026.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 12754 OF 2026 Sudam Dashrath Botre and Others …Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra and Others …Respondents Mr. Mandar Limaye a/w. Mr. Tanmay More and Ms. Anu Pawar, for the Petitioners. Mr. Manoj Badgujar, for Respondent No. 4- PMRDA. Smt. Tanu Bhatia, AGP, for the State. CORAM : MANISH PITALE AND SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, JJ. DATE : 29th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. : 1. The petitioners are aggrieved by impugned notices whereby the respondent No. 3- Sub-Divisional Engineer of the Public Works Sub- Division, Khed, Rajgurunagar, District Pune, has called upon the petitioners to remove "encroachment" on the 12.50 meter width allegedly forming part of a Major District Road. The notice has been issued under the provisions of the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the “Highways Act”). The notices call upon the petitioners to remove the encroachments within 7 days, failing which appropriate action would be taken for removal of the encroachment. Vishal Parekar ….1 2 20-wp-12754-2026.doc 2. The petitioners claim that the land belongs to them and therefore, even if the respondents intend to construct or widen a road, the land needs to be acquired and that compensation ought to be paid as per the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. 3. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 4 authority has raised a preliminary objection, stating that an alternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 24 of the said Act is available to the petitioners and that they ought to exhaust the said remedy. It is submitted that therefore, this Court may not entertain the present writ petition. 4. We have considered the rival submissions. Section 24 of the Highways Act reads as follows: S.24: Where the person on whom notice to remove an encroachment has been served under sub-section (1) of section 23 lays claim that the land in respect of which encroachment has been alleged is his property or that he has acquired a right over it by virtue of adverse possession or otherwise he shall within the time-limit prescribed in the notice for the removal of the encroachment, file an appeal before the Collector under intimation to the Highway Authority or the officer authorized under sub-section (1) of section 21, as the case may be. The Collector shall after due enquiry record his decision in writing and communicate the same to the appellant and the Highway Authority or such officer. The Highway Authority to such officer shall till then desist from taking further action in the matter. Vishal Parekar ….2 3 20-wp-12754-2026.doc 5. We find that the remedy of appeal under the above-quoted provision is indeed available to the petitioners in order to raise grievance with regard to the impugned notices. It is specifically provided that appeals can be filed within the time limit prescribed in the notice for removal of encroachment. The petitioners could have filed such appeals within 7 days of issuance of the impugned notices. Evidently, they have not done so. Instead, they have approached this Court invoking writ jurisdiction. The petition has been urgently circulated on the ground that recently the petitioners have been threatened with coercive action being taken for removal of the "encroachments". 6. We are of the opinion that when a statutory remedy of appeal is provided under the aforesaid provision of the said Act, whereby the Collector can conduct a fact-finding inquiry into the matter, it would be appropriate that the petitioners are relegated to such a remedy and ancillary directions can be issued to address the apprehension of the petitioners with regard to coercive action likely to be taken by the respondents. 7. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as follows: Vishal Parekar ….3 4 20-wp-12754-2026.doc (a) The petitioners are granted liberty to approach the appellate authority under Section 24 of the Maharashtra Highways Act, 1955, in order to challenge the impugned notices. (b) The respondents are restrained from taking coercive action in pursuance of the impugned notices, subject to the petitioners filing appeals under Section 24 of the said Act within 7 days from today. Since the said provision itself protects noticees during pendency of the appeal, the apprehension of the petitioners is duly addressed by the aforesaid direction. (c) Upon such appeals being filed within the period of 7 days from today, the appellate authority shall decide the appeals on merits after conducting proper inquiry and giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. (d) This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter, and the rights and contentions of the parties are kept open. (e) It is further directed that in the event adverse orders are Vishal Parekar ….4 5 20-wp-12754-2026.doc passed against the petitioners in the aforesaid appeals by the appellate authority, coercive action will not be taken by the respondent authorities for a period of two weeks from the date of disposal of the appeals. (SHREERAM V. SHIRSAT, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.) Vishal Parekar ….5