Maruti Jagannath Takmoge vs The Commissioner, Solapur Municipal Corporation And Ors.

2026:BHC-KOL:4442-DB
1819-26-wp.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1819 OF 2026
Netaji Shekumbar Bhopale
Age: 64 Yrs, Occupation:Farmer
R/o at. 143 Bhopale Nagar, Hotagi
Road, Majarewadi, North Solapur,
Taluka North Solapur, Dist. Solapur ….Petitioner
Versus
1 The Commissioner, Solapur
Municipal Corporation, a having
office at Indrabhavan, Solapur
2 The Additional Commissioner,
the Solapur Municipal
Corporation and the President,
the Executive Committee of
Disaster Management Cell,
Solapur Municipal Corporation
having office at Indrabhavan,
Solapur
3 The Collector Solapur,
having office at Solapur.
4 The State of Maharashtra,
Urban Development, Mantralaya
Mumbai, having office at Mumbai. …Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1820 OF 2026
Vilas Jagannath Takmoge
Age: 60 years Occupation: Farmer
R/o at. Takmoge Vasti, Hotagi
1/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
Road, Majarewadi,
North Solapur, Taluka North
Solapur, Dist. Solapur …Petitioner

Versus
1 The Commissioner, Solapur
Municipal Corporation, a having
office at Indrabhavan, Solapur
2 The Additional Commissioner,
the Solapur Municipal
Corporation and the President,
the Executive Committee of
Disaster Management Cell,
Solapur Municipal Corporation
having office at Indrabhavan,
Solapur
3 The Collector Solapur,
having office at Solapur.
4 The State of Maharashtra,
Urban Development Mantralaya
Mumbai, having office at Mumbai ….Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1821 OF 2026
Maruti Jagannath Takmoge
Age: 65 years Occupation:
R/o at. Takmoge Vasti, Hotgi
Road, Majarewadi, North Solapur,
Taluka North Solapur, Dist. Solapur
Vs.
1 The Commissioner, Solapur
Municipal Corporation, a having
office at Indrabhavan, Solapur
2 The Additional Commissioner,
2/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
the Solapur Municipal
Corporation and the President,
the Executive Committee of
Disaster Management Cell,
Solapur Municipal Corporation
having office at Indrabhavan,
Solapur

3 The Collector Solapur,
having office at Solapur.
4 The State of Maharashtra,
Urban Development Mantralaya
Mumbai, having office at Mumbai ….Respondents
Mr. Sarang S. Aradhye, a/w Mr. Shantanu Gurav a/w Ms.
Dnyaneshwari Utpat for the petitioners
Mr. Vishwanath Patil a/w Mr. Someshwar Wale, advocate for
respondent-Corporation
Ms. T. J. Kapre, AGP for respondent-State in WP 1819/2026
Mr. V. M. Mali, AGP for the respondent-State in WP 1820/2026
Mr. S. B. Kalel, AGP for the respondent-State in WP 1821/2026
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 09/06/2026
PRONOUNCED ON: 18/06/2026
JUDGMENT: PER (NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.)
1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
with consent of the parties.
2. All these Writ Petitions raise a common question and have an
identical set of facts. They are, therefore, being disposed of by the
3/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
present Judgment.

3. All these Writ Petitions challenge notices issued under the
provisions of The Disaster Management Act, 2005 (Hereinafter
referred to as ‘DM Act’) calling upon the petitioners mentioned
therein that the Solapur Municipal Corporation is going to
undertake the cleaning and desilting of drains to facilitate the
natural flow of the rainwater/storm water, and is going to construct
drains of permanent nature. The said notice further mentions that
the area of the petitioner is being affected by the said construction
and therefore, the petitioners are called upon not to obstruct the
said construction.
4. The facts as can be stated from the Writ Petition bearing No.
1819/2026 which is being considered as lead petition are as
follows:
(a) The Petitioner in the said petition is the owner of
agricultural land admeasuring 2H 91R situated at Gat
No. 76, Village Majarewadi, Taluka, North Solapur,
District: Solapur. Accordingly, the petitioners in the
remaining two Writ Petitions are also the owners of the
land mentioned in the said petitions, respectively.
(b) It is stated in the petition that the petitioners,
being the owners of the said land, have been in
4/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
possession of the said land for more than 100 years,

and it is private property of the petitioners. It is further
stated that there is no residential area or zone near the
said agricultural land and the said area is surrounded
by various other agricultural fields. It is further stated
that for the purpose of drain of rainwater, the trenches
are already in existence on the land of the petitioners,
and there is no issue of waterlogging in spite of heavy
rainfall.
(c) It is further stated that in backdrop of these facts,
the Respondent No. 2 i.e. The Additional
Commissioner, Solapur issued a notice under the
provisions of DM Act in which it was stated that the
Corporation is constructing a Nala(drain) over the
Petitioners’ area due to which a portion of the
Petitioners’ land is going to be affected and therefore,
they were directed not to cause any obstruction in the
said development, failing which, appropriate action
would be taken against them. It is this notice which is
challenged in the petition on various grounds, amongst
others.
5. We have heard Mr. Sarang Aradhye, learned advocate for the
petitioners, Mr. Vishwanath Patil for the respondent Corporation
and learned AGP in respective petitions.
6.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the action of
5/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
the respondents is extremely high-handed, and the reason is that the

respondents have absolutely no right to dispossess the petitioners
from the property without providing appropriate compensation. It is
also argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that a
substantial portion of the land is going to be affected and therefore,
the respondents cannot utilize their land without taking possession
thereof by following the provisions of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation
and Resettlement Act, 2013. It is the submission that the action of
the Respondents is violative of Article 300A of the Constitution of
India and, therefore, acquiring the land without payment of
compensation is unlawful.
7. Per contra , learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
vehemently opposed the contentions canvassed by the learned
counsel for the petitioners. It is stated that the landowner through
whose lands the drain (Nala) is flowing at some point of time has
illegally filled the Nala, diverted the same, and stopped the flow
without permission of the concerned authority. It is further
submitted that such illegal re-routing of the Nala has resulted in
obstructing the natural and free flow of the Nala. It is further stated
6/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
that in September 2025, there were torrential rains in Solapur

causing heavy floods and re-routing development substantially
restricted the discharge capacity of the Nala, which led to severe
flooding in the adjoining areas. It is further stated that Respondent
No. 2, in exercise of powers under Sections 26 and 30 of the DM
Act, has passed directions to the owners of the said land not to
cause any kind of hindrance or obstruction in the restoration and
construction process.
8. It is further stated in the affidavit-in-reply that the
Corporation has undertaken a city-wise storm water drainage
improvement project under ‘Maharashtra Suvarna Jayanti
Nagarotthan Mahabhiyan’ for mitigation of flooding and
improvement of drainage infrastructure within the area of Solapur
Municipal Corporation. Pursuant to the administrative approval,
technical sanctions were granted, and the tender process was
floated; resulting in issuance of a work order on 16/06/2025. It is
further stated in the affidavit-in-reply that the drainage network
proposed under the project is based on existing natural drainage
patterns, field surveys, topographical studies and engineering
requirements. As per the topographical survey sheet of the year
7/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
1978 and 2001, a natural drainage course/Nala was existing and

flowing through the area concerned. The alignment of the proposed
drainage work substantially follows and corresponds with the
natural drainage path historically existing in the area. As per the
averment in the affidavit-in-reply, under the said scheme mentioned
supra, work on 19 drains with a total length of 18.928 km has been
sanctioned in the city of Solapur. It is further stated in the affidavit
that if excavation and desilting operations are carried out along
with the said natural drainage alignment as shown in the approved
plans, the toposheet of 1978 and 2001 and maps, the accumulated
storm water from the areas as mentioned would immediately get
discharged through the natural drainage channel and therefore, the
work is necessary. It is further stated in the affidavit that in the
Disaster Management Committee Review Meeting held on
10/11/2025, the disaster management plan was approved and
technical survey report and temporary survey report were produced.
It is therefore stated that all statutory requirements, technical
approvals and administrative sanctions have been duly complied
with before commencement of the work.
9. Thus, it is the case of the respondent-Corporation that
8/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
Nala/drianage was already in existence and the petitioners are well

aware of the said existence. It is only the excavation and clearing of
the block of natural flow of said drain which has prompted the
Corporation to issue the notice impugned in the petition. It is
further stated that the Government of Maharashtra through the
Directorate of Town Planning and Valuation Department has
prescribed a GIS based development plan, standard operating
procedure (SOP) for preparation of existing land use maps and
development plans which mandates collection, digitization, Geo-
referencing validation and field verification of all the water features,
including river streams, drains, water bodies, flood lines and
direction of water flow.
10. As far as the legal provisions are concerned, it is stated in the
affidavit that the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act,
1966 and more particularly Section 22(d) requires preparation and
implementation of Development Plans having regard to existing
physical features, natural water resources, rivers, drainage channels,
etc. Reliance is also placed on Regulation 3.2.1 of the Unified
Development Control and Promotion Regulations for the same
purpose. It is further stated under the provisions of the Maharashtra
9/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 (Hereinafter referred to as ‘MMC

Act’), more particularly Section 153 and other allied sections, the
action is fully supported. It is further stated that the act of the
Corporation is not an act of acquisition, but a statutory drainage
management and flood mitigation measure undertaken in discharge
of mandatory duties imposed upon the respondent-Corporation
under the various provisions. It is thus stated that the action is
perfectly legal and valid.
11. In the backdrop of these facts, we have considered the
contentions canvassed by the learned respective counsels and also
gone through the record. The survey report of the Corporation, as
also the disaster management plan, has also been placed on record
by the learned counsel for the respondents.
12. The DM Act was brought into being to provide effective
management of disasters and the matters connected thereto or
incidental thereto. It was enacted by Parliament for the prevention
and mitigation of the effects of disasters and for undertaking a
holistic, coordinated, and prompt response to any disastrous
situation, and to provide requisite institutional mechanisms for
drawing up and monitoring the implementation of the disaster
10/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
management plans.

13.
Section 2(d) of the DM Act defines the term ‘disaster’ as
under:
“(d) “disaster” means a catastrophe, mishap, calamity or
grave occurrence in any area, arising from natural or man
made causes, or by accident or negligence which results
in substantial loss of life or human suffering or damage
to, and destruction of, property, or damage to, or
degradation of, environment, and is of such a nature or
magnitude as to be beyond the coping capacity of the
community of the affected area.”
14. Section 2(e) defines the term “disaster management” as
under:
“(e) “disaster management” means a continuous and
integrated process of planning, organising,
coordinating and implementing measures which are
necessary or expedient for—
(i) prevention of danger or threat of any disaster;
(ii) mitigation or reduction of risk of any disaster or its
severity or consequences;
(iii) capacity-building;
11/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
(iv) preparedness to deal with any disaster;

(v) prompt response to any threatening disaster
situation or disaster;
(vi) assessing the severity or magnitude of effects of
any disaster;
(vii) evacuation, rescue and relief;
(viii) rehabilitation and reconstruction”.
15. Likewise the MMC Act was brought on the statute book to
provide for the establishment of the Municipal Corporation in the
State of Maharashtra and to with a view to ensure the better
municipal government for the large urban areas. Section 2(17)
defines ‘drain’ as under:
“(17) “drain” includes a sewer, tunnel, pipe, ditch,
gutter or channel and any cistern, flush- tank, septic
tank or other device for carrying-off or treating sewage,
offensive matter, polluted water, sullage, waste water,
rain water, or sub-soil water and any culvert,
ventilation shaft or pipe or other appliance or fitting
connected therewith, and any ejectors, compressed air
mains, sealed sewage mains and special machinery or
apparatus for raising, collecting, expelling or removing
sewage or offensive matter from any place”.
12/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
16. Chapter 12 of the MMC Act is titled as "Drains And Drainage".

Section 153 provides that drains to be constructed and kept in
repair by the Commissioner. Section 153 is reproduced as under:
“153. Drains to be constructed and kept in repair by
the Commissioner.— (1) The Commissioner shall
maintain and keep in repair all municipal drains and
shall with the approval of the Corporation construct
such new drains as shall from time to time be necessary
for effectually draining the City.
(2) The Commissioner shall also, in the case of any
street in which there is a municipal drain, construct at
the charge of the Municipal Fund such portion of the
drain of any premises to be connected with such
municipal drain as it shall be necessary to lay under
any part of such street and the portion of any
connecting drains so laid under the street shall vest in
the Corporation and be maintained and kept in repair
by the Commissioner as a municipal drain.”
17.
Section 155 is a power of the Commissioner for making drains
and contemplates that The Commissioner may carry any municipal
drain through, across or under any street, or any place laid out as or
intended for a street or under any cellar or vault etc. It would be
relevant to reproduce Section 155 of the MMC Act which is as
13/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
under:

“155. Powers for making drains.— (1) The
Commissioner may carry any municipal drain through,
across or under any street, or any place laid out as or
intended for a street or under any cellar or vault which
may be under any street, and, after giving reasonable
notice in writing to the owner or occupier, into,
through or under any land whatsoever within City, or,
for the purpose of outfall or distribution of sewage,
without the City.
(2) The Commissioner may enter upon, and construct
any new drain in the place of an existing drain in, any
land wherein any municipal drain has been already
lawfully constructed, or repair or alter any municipal
drain so constructed.”
18. Section 157 provides for the power of the Municipal
Commissioner to clean drains. A meaningful reading of Sections 153
to 157, as also 158 and onwards, would reveal a scheme of the Act.
Sweeping powers are given to the Municipal Commissioner to lay
drains, maintain them and clean them. If the notice impugned in the
petition is perused, the Municipal Commissioner acting under the
provisions of the DM Act has only intimated the petitioners not to
14/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
cause any obstructions.

19.
Section 26 and Section 30 of the DM Act provide for powers
and functions of district authority which are exhaustive in nature. If
the Act, i.e., the DM Act and the MMC Act, and the provisions
reproduced herein supra are to be given a meaningful interpretation
in the backdrop of the intention of the legislature in enacting the
said statutes, it would reveal that the said notice which is impugned
in the petition is not foul of the said provisions.
20. A similar controversy arose before the Kerala High Court in
the Judgment of State of Kerala and Others Vs. Biju Ramesh and
1
Others . The Division Bench of the Kerala High Court, after taking
into consideration the provisions of the DM Act, went on to reject
the contention of the petitioners therein who were similarly situated
like the present petitioners. They were also issued notice in a like
nature as that of the present petitioners. The Division Bench of the
Kerala High Court went on to allow the Appeal of the State of Kerala
which had impugned the order of the Single Judge, thereby
quashing the notice.
21.
As far as the contention raised by the counsel for the
1
(2016) 3 KLT 16
15/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
petitioner regarding violation of Article 300A of the Constitution of

India, we are also not in favour of the petitioners. Article 300A of
the Constitution of India provides that no person shall be deprived
of his property, save by authority of law. Thus, what is protected
under Article 300A is that no one is to be deprived of his property
except by authority of law, which clearly means that by executing
executive orders [or administrative instructions] the government
cannot ask anybody to vacate his property or demolish his building.
But such actions are saved from being hit by Article 300A, which are
backed by authority of law. The notice impugned in the petitions
specifically makes out reference to the provisions of law i.e. the
provisions of the DM Act.
22. We have already held above that, in our considered opinion,
the DM Act read with the provisions of the MMC Act clearly spells
out the source of power to the respondent-Corporation to issue such
notice, the action being taken in the public interest. The contention
of the petitioners that the action amounts to acquisition and
therefore, the State cannot acquire the land without paying
compensation also does not hold any water since the notice
specifically contemplates that the action is being undertaken only in
16/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
the backdrop of the torrential rains that occurred in Solapur in

September 2025 and is in public interest.
23. We are also mindful of the fact that the Corporation, on
affidavit, has stated that there was in fact a Nala/drain running over
the property which has either been diverted or has been filled up by
the petitioners, which chokes the normal flow of water therefrom.
Thus, all the contentions raised by the petitioners do not have any
substance. The action being initiated, as we have already observed,
is after following the procedure under the DM Act.
24. Furthermore Section 72 of the DM Act gives an overriding
effect to the provisions of the said Act over any other law in force.
The effect of non obstanate clause has been considered by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in the Judgment of Union of India and Anr. v. G.
2
M. Kokil and Ors stating that it is well known that the non
obstanate clause is a legislative device which is usually employed to
give overriding effect to certain provisions over some contrary
provisions that may be found either in the same enactment or some
other enactment, that is to say, to avoid the operation and effect of
all contrary provisions.
2
1984 (Supp) SCC 196
17/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::

1819-26-wp.doc
25. The petitioner in the petition has stated that there is an

existing drain (Nala) which is sufficient for the discharge of water,
however, the respondent on affidavit has stated that there was a
drain (Nala), but which has been choked by the acts of the
petitioners and therefore, the desilting and excavation work is
being done. Thus, there are disputed questions of facts which arise
which we would be reluctant to interfere in Writ Jurisdiction.
26. Thus, taking over all view of the matter and for the reasons
stated supra, we are of the considered opinion that the petitions are
without any merit and deserve dismissal. They are accordingly
dismissed.
[NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.] [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.]
Iresh
Digitally signed
by IRESH
MASHAL
Date: 2026.06.22
17:46:08 +0530
IRESH
MASHAL
18/18
::: Uploaded on - 22/06/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 22/06/2026 18:11:41 :::