Case Name: CIDCO Aurangabad vs. Imtiyaz Khan & Anr.
Petition Type: Special Leave Petition (C) No(s). 16602‑16603/2026.
Origin: Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 25‑02‑2026 in FA No. 907/2019 and FA No. 908/2019 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay at Aurangabad.
Court/Authority: Supreme Court of India.
Order Date: 27‑05‑2026 (recorded at 16:46:43 IST).
Period of Dispute/Violation: Not applicable (challenge to prior High Court orders).
Parties Involved
Petitioner: CIDCO AURANGABAD.
Respondent(s): Imtiyaz Khan & Anr.
Petitioner Counsel: Senior Counsel Balbir Singh; Additional counsel: Samir Malik (AOR), Tushar Mathur, Mahip Singh Sikarwar, Snehal Kaila, Naman Tandan.
Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.V. Viswanathan and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vipul M. Pancholi.
Issues / Allegations / Violations
Petition sought exemption from filing copy/counter‑claim of the impugned judgment (IA No. 141006/2026) and challenged the validity of the High Court’s orders dated 25‑02‑2026 in FA Nos. 907/2019 and 908/2019.
The core allegation was that the High Court judgments were erroneous and required Supreme Court intervention.
Findings & Observations
After hearing counsel for both sides, the Court expressed that it was not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgments/orders of the High Court.
No substantive legal reasoning or precedent was detailed beyond the decision to dismiss the petitions.
Penalties / Settlements / Directions
No monetary penalties, settlements, or sanctions were imposed on either party.
Corrective Actions & Future Obligations
The Court did not prescribe any corrective measures or future compliance obligations for the parties.
Final Ruling & Enforcement
Dismissal: The Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) 16602‑16603/2026 are dismissed.
Pending Applications: Any pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.
Enforcement: The order is final and enforceable as recorded by the Court Master (Senior Personal Assistant) Lokesha Arora and Komal.
