AVDHOOT MADHUKAR GAIKWAD AND ORS vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT AND ANR — HCBM10154392026

Case under Mah. Regional Town Planning Act. Status: For Orders (Objection Not Removed). Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

For Orders (Objection Not Removed) Next hearing 12-Jun-2026 this date has passed

CNR: HCBM010154392026

Filing Number

WP/8929/2026

Filing Date

27-Mar-2026

Judge

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

Coram

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

Bench Type

Division

Category

TOWN PLANNING ( 39 )

Sub-Category

TOWN PLANNING MATTERS INCLUDING MATTERS RELATING TO RESERVATION,TOWN PLANNING SCHEMES ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Mah. Regional Town Planning Act

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AVDHOOT MADHUKAR GAIKWAD AND ORS

    Adv. Parag Tilak

  2. 2.DEVENDRA MADHUKAR GAIKWAD

  3. 3.RAJENDRA MADHUKAR GAIKWAD

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA URBAN DEVELOPMENT DEPT AND ANR

  2. 2.NASHIK MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THR ITS COMMISSIONER

Case History

  1. 12-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 12-Jun-2026

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

    Case Summary Writ Petition No. 8929 of 2026 (Bombay High Court) - The petitioners failed to remove office objections after being notified on 30 April 2026. The Registrar granted a final two-week extension to cure the defects, warning that failure to do so will result in refusal of registration under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. Case adjourned pending compliance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 30-Apr-2026

    Objections To Be Removed

    Assistant Registrar

  4. 27-Mar-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Writ Petition No. 8929 of 2026 (Bombay High Court) - The petitioners failed to remove office objections after being notified on 30 April 2026. The Registrar granted a final two-week extension to cure the defects, warning that failure to do so will result in refusal of registration under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. Case adjourned pending compliance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case