Case Note & Summary
The matter before the Bombay High Court arose from two writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The first petition, Writ Petition No. 1022 of 2025, was instituted by M/s. Atria Constructions, a developer, challenging a stop work notice dated 10 December 2024 issued by the Junior Engineer and Deputy Engineer of the Building Development Department of the Pune Municipal Corporation. The second petition, Writ Petition No. 10414 of 2025, was filed by 49 individuals who had purchased flats in the building constructed by the developer and claimed they were being deprived of occupation of their flats due to the municipal corporation’s refusal to grant an occupation certificate following the stop work notice. The project in question was known as ‘Rajgruhi Residency’ and comprised four wings (A, B, C, and D), each with podiums, amenities, and 20 floors. The landowner, Wellbuild Merchants Pvt. Ltd., had originally developed Wings A and B, which were completed and occupied by flat purchasers who had formed a cooperative society. Under an agreement dated 18 August 2021, the developer undertook construction of Wings C and D. Wing D had been fully completed, and an application for an occupation certificate had been made. Most flats in Wing D had been sold, and the purchasers were awaiting occupancy. Wing C had reached four floors of construction. A dispute arose between the developer and the landowner, Wellbuild, leading to termination of the development agreement by Wellbuild. The developer contended that 70% of the required realignment of a storm water drain had been completed, and therefore the grievances of residents of Towers A and B did not survive. The court observed that the entire controversy was a private dispute between Wellbuild and the developer, and it appeared that the municipal machinery was being used to settle these private disputes. Wellbuild had filed an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 prior to receiving the developer’s reply to the termination notice. The court reserved its judgment on 4 August 2025 and pronounced it on 21 November 2025, but the provided text does not include the final decision or ratio decidendi.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Petitions - Challenge to Stop Work Notice - Constitution of India, Article 226 - Developer filed writ petition to quash stop work notice dated 10 December 2024 after completing construction of Wing D and applying for occupation certificate - Court noted that the dispute was wholly between developer and landowner and municipal machinery appeared to be used to settle private disputes - Held: Not mentioned (Paras 3, 6-9, 15). B) Municipal Law - Occupation Certificate - Withholding due to Private Disputes - Not mentioned - Flat purchasers filed writ petition seeking grant of occupation certificate, being deprived of possession due to stop work notice - Court observed that they were sandwiched between disputing parties - Held: Not mentioned (Paras 4, 8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the stop work notice issued by the municipal corporation after completion of construction was valid, and whether the municipal corporation can withhold occupation certificate due to a private dispute between the developer and the landowner.
Law Points
- Article 226 of Constitution of India
- writ jurisdiction
- stop work notice
- occupation certificate
- private dispute
- municipal machinery misuse
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996 Section 9
- developer
- flat purchaser rights
