Bombay High Court Stays Demolition of Sai Resort Owned By Close Aid of UBT Leader
Bombay High Court Questions Constitutionality of 2023 Animal Birth Control Rules; Asks Union Government to Respond
Petitioner Sadanand Gangaram Kadam challenged a demolition notice issued against him on December 6, 2023. Kadam contended that he had obtained non-agriculture (NA) permission on August 3, 2021, from the Sub Divisional Officer before developing the resort.
The High Court noted that the private complaint by Vijay Bhosale regarding the Khed land was not prima facie maintainable at all, after he had retired from the firm.
Observing that the facts of the case were prima facie “shocking,” the Bombay High Court has stayed the notice to demolish ‘Sai Resort’ in Raigad district owned by Sadanand Kadam, a close aide of Shiv Sena (UBT) faction member and former Maharashtra cabinet minister – MLC Anil Parab.
“It is clarified that no coercive steps shall be taken against the Petitioner’s construction on the said land at Khed in view of the present Writ Petition being heard by this Court as directed above,” Justice Milind N. Jadhav directed in an ad-interim order on January 5, 2024.
The origin of the conflict traces back to the land’s purchase in Khed by the partnership firm M/s Sai Star Distributors, where Kadam and Vijay Bhosale were partners, among three others. Through a consent award on May 6, 2017, the disputes among partners were resolved, leading to Bhosale’s retirement from the firm and the transfer of Khed land entitlement to the petitioner.
While granting time to respondents to file their reply, the Court stayed the demolition notice and directed that no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner’s construction at Khed, during the pendency of the writ petition.
The Court also clarified that the statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority shall not proceed, in view of the factual situation. The petitioner was represented by advocates Shardul Singh and Prerna Gandhi.
The Court has directed the respondents to file their reply within two weeks, with rejoinder by the petitioner within a week thereafter. The matter will now be heard on February 2, 2024 for interim directions.
