28.WP13561.2023.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.13561 OF 2023 Rajeev Jainath Gupta. … Petitioner. Versus The Commissioner, Bhiwandi Nizampura City Municipal Corporation And Ors. … Respondents -------------- Mr. Prince Kumar Upadhyay a/w. Purvang Kamdar, Parth Keni, Patrick Gomes and Mr. Gitesh Sawant i/b. Equalis Justitia, Advocate for the Petitioner. Ms. Pooja Malik i/b. Mr. N.R. Bubna, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Sanjay Patil, Advocate for Respondent No. 4. Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. G.P. with Mr. A.A. Alaspurkar, AGP for Respondent/State. -------------- CORAM : M. S. KARNIK & SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ. DATE : 30th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. : 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. We find that the very cause for which this Petition is filed, the earlier Writ Petition No. 8298 of 2016 filed by the Petitioner was dismissed by the following order : “1. The petitioner claims that he is the co-owner of the subject property illegally constructed by his uncle. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the father of the petitioner had filed a suit for claiming his Talwalkar 1 ARUNA SANDEEP TALWALKAR Digitally signed by ARUNA SANDEEP TALWALKAR Date: 2026.09.30 17:28:23 +0530 28.WP13561.2023.odt share. The uncle of the petitioner has also filed a suit challenging the notice of the Corporation wherein ad- interim order has been passed. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 submitted that the status quo order is in operation. In view of all these facts, we do not find any merit in this petition. The petitioner may resort to alternate remedies as available in law. Petition disposed of.” 3. In all fairness, we must observe that the Petitioner has annexed the aforesaid order as Exh. B to the Petition. 4. The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that constructions in question is unauthorised. 5. Since this Court had already granted a liberty to resort to alternative remedies as available in law, it is not possible for us to entertain the present Petition considering that there are no change in circumstances. 6. Keeping the liberty of the Petitioner to resort to alternative remedies open, this Writ Petition is rejected. (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.) Talwalkar 2