Authority: High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction

Order Date: 9 September 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Review Petitioners – Rohit Dhanesh Ruke and others; Respondent – Durga Co‑op. Housing Society Ltd. and others.
  • The Review Petition sought a review of the order dated 24‑April‑2026 passed in Writ Petition No. 1289 of 2000, which resulted in the closure of a road used by the Review Petitioners.
  • Petitioners alleged that the road is an access way to their plots, citing NA orders from November 1985 onward, a 05‑Nov‑1990 order favoring D.D. Desai, and recent development permissions and commencement certificates issued by the Pune Metropolitan Region Development Authority (PMRDA).
  • They contended they were not heard when the original order was passed and that the Village Panchayat, which could have raised the issue, did not appear before the Court.
  • Respondent Durga CHS argued that earlier applications (e.g., by Deccan Development Corporation in 1988) did not result in any order and that the current dispute should not be reopened.

Court Findings

  • The Court noted that the predecessor of the Review Petitioners had applied for the road in 1988, but no order was passed then.
  • It observed that the NA order of 05‑Nov‑1990 pertains to a different property and does not obligate Durga CHS to keep the road open for the Review Petitioners.
  • The Court found that the subsequent NA orders (from November 1985 onward) did not consider the scope of conditions on Durga CHS regarding the road’s availability.
  • Given the numerous disputed questions, the Court held that it is not possible to adjudicate them within the limited review jurisdiction.
  • The Court emphasized that the Review Petitioners were not heard and the Village Panchayat did not appear, therefore the Petitioners’ remedies under law must remain open.

Final Outcome

  • The interim application and the review petition are disposed of without any order as to costs.
  • Any further proceedings by the Review Petitioners against Durga CHS, the Tahsildar, Collector, PMRDA, or related authorities shall be decided in accordance with law, independent of the observations made in the order under review or the present order.
  • All parties are directed to act on the duly authenticated or digitally signed QR‑verifiable copy of this order.

This content may not be financially relevant.