ABDUL HAMEED ABDUL RAUF ANSARI vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO. ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVE. DEPT. — HCBM10020512026

Case under Right to Fair Compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition,rehabilitation & Resettlement Act,2013. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: HCBM010020512026

Filing Number

WP/1218/2026

Filing Date

14-Jan-2026

Judge

Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)

Coram

Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)

Bench Type

Division

Category

LAND ACQUISITION/REQUISITION(CENTRAL/STATE) ( 20 )

Sub-Category

COMPENSATION ( 8 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 03-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Right to Fair Compensation & Transparency in Land Acquisition,rehabilitation & Resettlement Act,2013

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ABDUL HAMEED ABDUL RAUF ANSARI

    Adv. F N Momin

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO. ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY URBAN DEVE. DEPT.

  2. 2.BHIWANDI NIZAMPUR CITY MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

  3. 3.ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF TOWN PLANNING

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 24-Mar-2026

    Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)View PDF

    Summary: Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 1218 of 2026 in the Bombay High Court was given a final opportunity to remove office objections within two weeks. The petitioner's advocate had previously failed to comply with multiple notices to cure defects despite being granted extensions. The court warned that failure to remove objections within the prescribed two-week period will result in automatic refusal of petition registration without further court reference. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 24-Mar-2026

    For Orders (Objection Not Removed)

    Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)

  4. 06-Mar-2026

    Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)View PDF

  5. 11-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 14-Jan-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 1218 of 2026 in the Bombay High Court was given a final opportunity to remove office objections within two weeks. The petitioner's advocate had previously failed to comply with multiple notices to cure defects despite being granted extensions. The court warned that failure to remove objections within the prescribed two-week period will result in automatic refusal of petition registration without further court reference. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case