Prabhakar Ramchandra Kulkarni vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thru The Additional Chief Secretary

CNR No : HCBM020301792026

2026:BHC-OS:22734-DB
906 WP L 30178-26.doc
1/7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 30178 OF 2026
Prabhakar Ramchandra Kulkarni .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra, Thr The .. Respondent
Additional Chief Secretary.
WITH
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 19824 OF 2026
Prabhakar Ramchandra Kulkarni .. Petitioner
Versus
The Deputy Registrar Co-operative .. Respondent
Societies
Mr. Sanjiv Sawant a/w Mr. Abhishek Deshmukh, Ms. Bhakti Wast &
Mr. Nikhil Seth for the Petitioners in both Petitions.
Mr. Rakesh Pathak (AGP) a/w Smt. Rita Joshi, AGP (through VC) for
the State in both Petitions.
Mr. V.K. Tiwari a/w Mr. Mukesh Sirswal, Mr. Arif Shaikh i/b Veteran
Global Lawyers & Associates for Respondent No.4.
Mr. Rajkumar Mishra i/b Shakti Deengar for Respondent No.6.
Mr. Deepan Dixit for the Intervener.
CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE &
ASHISH S. CHAVAN, JJ.
th
DATED : 15 OCTOBER, 2026
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER BHARATI DANGRE J):-
1. The Two Writ Petitions, one being filed by the Prabhakar
Ramchandra Kulkarni along with six others WP (L) No. 30178 of
2026 and the second Writ Petition (L) No. 19824 of 2026 is filed by
Mr. Prabhakar Ramchandra Kulkarni alone, are placed before us.
Ashish
Uploaded on - 19/10/2026 Downloaded on - 19/10/2026 17:53:59

906 WP L 30178-26.doc
2/7
Both the Writ Petitions involve the bifurcation of ‘Shree’
Building, of which the Petitioners claim to be the residents.
Shree Building, according to the Petitioners is an independent,
self-contained residential structure comprising of 12 flats, standing
on Plot No. 19, forming part of the land held by Respondent No.4
(Society) which is under Government lease.
It is the grievance of the Petitioners that they are entitled for
bifurcation of ‘Shree Building’ from Respondent No.4 Society and
they seek conversion of the land to Occupancy Class I.
2. We have heard learned Counsel Mr. Sawant representing the
Petitioners and respective counsels appearing for the Respondents.
By consent of parties, we deem it appropriate to issue Rule,
which is made returnable forthwith.
The background facts would reveal that the Respondent No.4,
the Bombay Suburban District Government Servants’ Co-operative
Housing Society was registered in the year 1950 and pursuant to an
agreement executed with the Additional Collector, Bombay Suburban
District and the Society, the land admeasuring 15,510 sq yards was
handed over to the Society and eight buildings came to be
constructed, of which Shree Building is one of them. It is the case of
the Petitioner that the buildings are now due for re-development and
it is collectively submitted before us that the process was initiated
with the participation of the Petitioners and it involved all the eight
buildings. However, at a subsequent point of time, the Petitioner
intended to have segregation of Shree Building and wanted to
develop it individually.
Ashish
Uploaded on - 19/10/2026 Downloaded on - 19/10/2026 17:53:59

906 WP L 30178-26.doc
3/7
As a result, steps were initiated for its bifurcation /separation
from the Society and the series of orders being part of WP (L) No.
30178 of 2026 would reveal that upon the said representation /
communications addressed, survey was conducted by the Land
Survey Officer, Chembur and report was submitted to the Collector
regarding bifurcation of ‘Shree’ Building and its conversion into
Occupancy Class I.
3. This was followed by a report being forwarded by the
Collector on 20/11/2025 to the Additional Chief Secretary (Revenue),
based upon the report which he received from the City Survey Officer
as well as, the report from Tahsildar. The Collector recommended, the
proposal of the Petitioner and made a request for bifurcation of Shree
Building comprising of 12 members and permitting them to
constitute an independent Co-operative Housing Society and its
conversion into Occupancy Class I.
This resulted into an order being passed on 05/03/2026 by the
Revenue and Forest Department, directing necessary steps to be taken
for implementing the said recommendation including the change in
the name of the building and its separation from Survey No. 525,
525/1 to 5 and pursuant to the said proceedings being completed it
was directed that it shall deserve its consideration as Occupancy
Class I.
Pursuant thereto, the Collector by its communication dated
11/03/2026 communicated to the Petitioners that they will be required
to take necessary steps in compliance with the directions issued by
Mantralaya.
Ashish
Uploaded on - 19/10/2026 Downloaded on - 19/10/2026 17:53:59

906 WP L 30178-26.doc
4/7
4. At this stage, the stand of Respondent No.4, the Society of
which Shree Building till date is a part deserve consideration.
Respondent No.4, Society, has filed its detailed affidavit in
reply holding out that in the past, the attempts by Mr. Kulkarni for
segregating the building failed as on 21/02/2006, the Collector had
rejected the request by observing that the Shree Building is a part of
Bombay Suburban District Government Co-operative Housing
Society Ltd, Chembur and it shall not be permitted to be segregated.
However, it is a specific contention of Respondent No.4 that
behind its back once again the process was initiated by the
Petitioners, i.e. occupants of Shree Building, which resulted into an
order being passed by the Additional Chief Secretary permitting the
segregation and also its conversion into Occupancy Class I. However,
on gaining knowledge about the said order, since the copy of the said
order was also marked to the Society, the members of the Respondent
No.4 Society addressed communication on 20/04/2026, to the Deputy
Registrar, Co-operative Societies, agitating their grievance and
pointing out the earlier orders and for the specific reason, as to why
the segregation shall not be permitted.
5. This was followed by a notice being addressed to Mr.
Prabhakar Ramchandra Kulkarni and 11 members along with the
Chairman and Secretary of Respondent No.4 Society on 18/05/2026
and the Deputy Registrar expressed its opinion that bifurcation of
Shree Building is not a feasible option and he specifically set out his
reasons in the order dated 18/05/2026.
Ashish
Uploaded on - 19/10/2026 Downloaded on - 19/10/2026 17:53:59

906 WP L 30178-26.doc
5/7
Taking clue form this order, the Collector, Mumbai Suburban
by his communication dated 11/06/2026, addressed to the Additional
Chief Secretary, Revenue, also expressed the inability to permit such
segregation by indicating that the land allotted to the Respondent
No.4 Society was collective and it was in an amalgamated form and
therefore it will not be possible to segregate it and rather it was
suggested that if the redevelopment has to take place than it shall be
by considering all the eight buildings together.
6. The Petitioner Mr. Prabhakar Kulkarni filed another Writ
Petition (L) No. 19824 of 2026 and on 22/06/2026, the Deputy
Registrar of Co-operative Society was asked to put up its stand.
Apprehending any adverse action the Petitioner approached the
Revenue Minister and prayed for maintaining a status quo.
Even the Respondent No.4 Society also approached the
Hon’ble Minister and in the Minutes of Meeting, recorded and placed
as a part of the Writ Petition filed by Mr. Prabhakar Kulkarni, we
have noted some findings are in favour of Respondent No.4 Society,
but admittedly that is not yet converted into an order passed by the
Revenue Department.
As we are conscious of the position that mere noting or any
decisions taken solely by the Hon’ble Minister itself would not
amount to an order passed by the State Government, we are at a
stage, that at the request of the Respondent No.4 Society, the
Collector has already forwarded a proposal to the Additional Chief
Secretary informing that the earlier proposal by him permitting
separate development of Shree Society is not feasible and the
Society’s re-development if at all has to be permitted in a collective
Ashish
Uploaded on - 19/10/2026 Downloaded on - 19/10/2026 17:53:59

906 WP L 30178-26.doc
6/7
manner.
7. The contention of the Petitioner and the Respondent No.4 in
the proceedings before us is passing orders behind each others back.
Respondent No.4 submits that the earlier orders which are procured
by the Petitioner are behind its back and in particular the order which
is passed by the Additional Chief Secretary on 05/03/2026, whereas it
is the contention of the Petitioner that the proceedings before the
Hon’ble Minister as a result of which it is proposed that the earlier
order passed by the Collector and the State Government shall not be
implemented, is passed behind back of the Petitioners.
8. Amongst this, we also have an Interim Application filed by the
flat owners in Shree Building, and the learned counsel Mr. Deepan
Dixit vehemently object to the separate re-development of Shree
Building, though Mr. Sawant would dispute his locus to intervene and
raise an objection as according to him, his membership is in dispute.
9. In any case, in the whole episode and looking at the stage at
which the Societies have reached and are awaiting their re-
development and fortunately for us we have noted the submissions of
the counsel for Respondent No.4 as well as the counsel representing
the Petitioner that all of them are interested in re-development of
their respective buildings.
The only option which we look forward is resolving the issue
by directing the contesting parties to be present before the Collector,
Mumbai Suburban District and we direct the Collector to grant an
opportunity of hearing to the members of the Shree Building
including the interveners and the Officer bearers of Respondent No.4
Ashish
Uploaded on - 19/10/2026 Downloaded on - 19/10/2026 17:53:59

906 WP L 30178-26.doc
7/7
Society.
The Collector shall also take into consideration the aspect that
as far as Respondent No.4 Society is concerned, which also includes
Shree Building, the positive steps have been taken towards re-
development by following the process under Section 79-A and we
are also informed that a Developer is also appointed.
We make it clear that while considering the claim of the
Petitioner to have its building redeveloped separately, the Collector
shall take into consideration all these aspects.
We request the Collector, Mumbai Suburban to conduct the
hearing on 28/10/2026 at 11:00 a.m., but for any reason, if it is not
possible for him to conduct the proceedings, we expect the parties to
report to his office and a further date shall be allotted.
We expect the Collector to apply his mind afresh to the entire
discord, irrespective of whatever orders have been passed in the past.
The learned AGP to communicate the order to the Collector.
With the above directions, the Writ Petitions are disposed of.

(ASHISH S. CHAVAN, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)
Ashish
Uploaded on - 19/10/2026 Downloaded on - 19/10/2026 17:53:59
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)