KAJAL SUNIL WADIKAR vs THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COLLECTOR ( ADDITIONAL/NUINSANCE) AND ORS — WP/5808/2026

Case under Mah. Slum Areas Act Section NA. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM010203442026

Filing Number

WP/11854/2026

Filing Date

21-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/5808/2026

Registration Date

28-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik , Hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. Modak

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik , Hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. Modak

Bench Type

Division

Category

SLUM AREAS ( 49 )

Sub-Category

SLUM AREAS ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Mah. Slum Areas Act Section NA

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KAJAL SUNIL WADIKAR

    Adv. Puja bhatta

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COLLECTOR ( ADDITIONAL/NUINSANCE) AND ORS

  2. 2.COMPETENT AUTHORITY-6, SLUM REHABILITATION AUTHORITY

  3. 3.WHITE BERRY BUILDER TECH LTD

  4. 4.SECRETARY/CHAIRMAN

  5. 5.APPELLATE AUTHORITY

  6. 6.VAISHALI PRAMOD JADHAV

  7. 7.VANDANA WADIKAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik,hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. ModakView PDF

    The Bombay High Court dismissed Kajal Sunil Wadikar's writ petition against the Additional District Collector and others, finding that an efficacious statutory remedy existed before the AGRC (Appellate Grievance Redressal Committee). The court declined to set aside the impugned order and instead granted liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the AGRC within two weeks, requesting expeditious disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Fresh Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik , Hon'ble Shri Justice S. M. Modak

  4. 21-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/5808/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed Kajal Sunil Wadikar's writ petition against the Additional District Collector and others, finding that an efficacious statutory remedy existed before the AGRC (Appellate Grievance Redressal Committee). The court declined to set aside the impugned order and instead granted liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal before the AGRC within two weeks, requesting expeditious disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case