SATYABABU RAMLAKHAN GUPTA vs COMPETENT AUTHORITY -7, SRA — WP/2472/2026

Case under Mah. Slum Areas Act Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 07th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020165742026

Filing Number

WP/16573/2026

Filing Date

06-May-2026

Registration No

WP/2472/2026

Registration Date

13-May-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

TOWN PLANNING ( 39 )

Sub-Category

SLUM REDEVELOPEMENT SCHEMES ( 3 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

07-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 21-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Mah. Slum Areas Act Section 226

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SATYABABU RAMLAKHAN GUPTA

    Adv. ASHWIN S TRIPATHI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.COMPETENT AUTHORITY -7, SRA

  2. 2.DY. COLLECTOR SPECIAL CELL, WESTERN SUBURN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 07-May-2026

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

    Case Summary: WP (L) 16573/2026 The Bombay High Court disposed of Satyababu Ramlakhan Gupta's writ petition by granting the SRA's Competent Authority a four-week extension to decide his pending representation, which should have been decided per the Court's April 9, 2026 order. The Court warned that failure to decide within this period would result in summoning the authority for non-compliance. An interim order from a related petition (WP 6527/2026) was continued for six weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 07-May-2026

    For Circulation

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

  4. 06-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/2472/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WP (L) 16573/2026 The Bombay High Court disposed of Satyababu Ramlakhan Gupta's writ petition by granting the SRA's Competent Authority a four-week extension to decide his pending representation, which should have been decided per the Court's April 9, 2026 order. The Court warned that failure to decide within this period would result in summoning the authority for non-compliance. An interim order from a related petition (WP 6527/2026) was continued for six weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case