DARSHAN JAYANT BUILDERS vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT — IA/2189/2026

Case under Mah. Housing & Area Devolopment Act Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020132972026

Filing Number

IA/13297/2026

Filing Date

16-Apr-2026

Registration No

IA/2189/2026

Registration Date

20-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

HOUSING AND AREA DEVELOPMENT ( 50 )

Sub-Category

Housing Area Development ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 27-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Mah. Housing & Area Devolopment Act Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DARSHAN JAYANT BUILDERS

    Adv. V S Jadhav,V S Jadhav,V S Jadhav, ,V S Jadhav

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE MINISTRY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT

  2. 2.MUMBAI BUILDING REPAIRS AND RECONSTRUCTION BOARD(A MHADA UNIT)

  3. 3.MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI

  4. 4.RESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

  5. 5.THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, D-WARD, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI

  6. 6.THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER (ZONE II)

  7. 7.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER(D -

  8. 8.DIVISION

  9. 9.GEETANJALI CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED (ORIG PETITIONER)

  10. 10.RAJENDRA HONKAR KAMBLE (ORIG PETITIONER)

  11. 11.ISCO BUILDERS LLP (ORIG PETITIONER)

  12. 12.ISHWARLAL MOHABATRAM LAKHARA (ORIG PETITIONER)

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

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

    Case Summary: IA 2189/2026 The Bombay High Court disposed of the writ petition filed by Geetanjali Co-operative Housing Society and others challenging the Executive Engineer's rejection of their redevelopment proposal. The Executive Engineer had refused to process the proposal citing deficiencies, including insufficient valid consents (below 51% threshold) and inclusion of private plots violating DCPR Regulation 33(24). The court found prima facie that petitioners possessed 51% consents requiring verification and held that petitioners deserved a fair opportunity to explain and rectify deficiencies. The court directed petitioners to file a detailed representation to the Chief Officer (MBRRB) within two weeks, requiring the Chief Officer to conduct independent hearings with both petitioners and competing developer Darshan Jayant Builders within eight weeks, deciding the matter on merits without being bound by the Executive Engineer's findings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    Interim Application

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

  4. 04-May-2026

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

  5. 04-May-2026

    Interim Application

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

  6. 28-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 21-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice M. S. Karnik,hon'ble Shri Justice R. N. LaddhaView PDF

  8. 17-Apr-2026

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

  9. 16-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. IA/2189/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: IA 2189/2026 The Bombay High Court disposed of the writ petition filed by Geetanjali Co-operative Housing Society and others challenging the Executive Engineer's rejection of their redevelopment proposal. The Executive Engineer had refused to process the proposal citing deficiencies, including insufficient valid consents (below 51% threshold) and inclusion of private plots violating DCPR Regulation 33(24). The court found prima facie that petitioners possessed 51% consents requiring verification and held that petitioners deserved a fair opportunity to explain and rectify deficiencies. The court directed petitioners to file a detailed representation to the Chief Officer (MBRRB) within two weeks, requiring the Chief Officer to conduct independent hearings with both petitioners and competing developer Darshan Jayant Builders within eight weeks, deciding the matter on merits without being bound by the Executive Engineer's findings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case