HARAKU SAKHARAM CHOUDHARI vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — WP/5111/2026
Case under Bombay Land Acquisition Act 1948 Section n. Status: Fresh Admission. Next hearing: 24th June 2026.
CNR: HCBM010163812026
Filing Number
WP/9467/2026
Filing Date
02-Apr-2026
Registration No
WP/5111/2026
Registration Date
17-Apr-2026
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale , Hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak Shirsat
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale , Hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak Shirsat
Bench Type
Division
Category
LAND ACQUISITION/REQUISITION(CENTRAL/STATE) ( 20 )
Sub-Category
ACQUISITION FOR CRZ PROJECTS ( 3 )
Judicial Branch
Civil
Last updated 28-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.HARAKU SAKHARAM CHOUDHARI
Adv. SUMANT RAJARAM DESHPANDE
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
-
2.THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER NO. 22, PUNE
-
3.THE MAHARASHTRA KRISHNA VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, PUNE
Case History
-
24-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
24-Jun-2026
Fresh Admission
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale , Hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak Shirsat
-
23-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale,hon'ble Shri Justice Shreeram Vinayak ShirsatView PDF
Case Summary: The Bombay High Court adjourned WP 5111/2026 to 24.06.2026. Petitioner Haraku Sakharam Choudhari challenged land acquisition proceedings, contending the acquisition lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, as neither possession was taken nor compensation paid. The court issued notice and directed respondents to file reply affidavits within four weeks, with rejoinder within two weeks thereafter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
23-Apr-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
02-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP/5111/2026
Case Summary: The Bombay High Court adjourned WP 5111/2026 to 24.06.2026. Petitioner Haraku Sakharam Choudhari challenged land acquisition proceedings, contending the acquisition lapsed under Section 24(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 2013, as neither possession was taken nor compensation paid. The court issued notice and directed respondents to file reply affidavits within four weeks, with rejoinder within two weeks thereafter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts