Talk:Panvel

Merger Proposal
Moved from inline comments within the article:
 * I think this article is a lot about Panvel that belongs to Raigad. However, this article claims a few things that belong only to New Panvel. e.g. Pillai College of Architecture. Please seperate New Panvel from Panvel.

CDC (talk) 18:13, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

No. It would be a bad idea to seperate new panvel article out since the two areas overlap a lot. Personally I have resided in both places and these are basically east and west side of the same town with the Mumbai-Goa highway in between. Too much overlap when it comes to wikipedia entry. --Kedar (talk) 07:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

New Panvel & Panvel, though very close, are different in all aspects. Be it town planning, infrastructure, mix of inhabitants, etc... Honestly, its not like East & West of a locality. I think, they should be seperate. (Ishtiyaq Kasu) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.95.226.3 (talk) 10:38, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Do not merge
Panvel and New Panvel are completly different, though New Panvel falls within Panvel boundaires, New Panvel has marked itself with its differnet status from the time the Government named it as New Panvel. Geographically New panvel comes from a portion of Panvel, gets its indedependent status becuase of the de-markation in developments and planning (KK (talk) 13:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC))

Panvel Tahasildar office
Dear sir, Also please provide information of Panvel Tahasildar office and complete address with Telephone number, what function are carried out by the office with its location.

In case of property registration, one finds difficult to know. please provide timing of office,and the areas/villages and nodes attached to the Tahasildar office.

Also provide the basic local transport available, bus/auto and fare to various place in and around Panvel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.119.221.18 (talk) 17:11, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Coordinate error
The following coordinate fixes are needed for

—122.15.104.227 (talk) 04:36, 4 October 2016 (UTC) vo8g8fu


 * You haven't explained what was erroneous about the coordinates in the article, but I've adjusted them somewhat. Deor (talk) 15:22, 4 October 2016 (UTC)