Bombay High Court

RAJHOJI NARAYAN JAYBHAYEE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court ordered the parties to appear before the State authority on 2 July 2026, mandated that the revision proceedings be decided within three months thereafter, and continued the status‑quo until such disposal.

Summary

The applicants, Rajhoji and others, sought a continuation of the status quo while a revision petition pending before the State of Maharashtra remained undecided. The High Court had earlier directed the State to decide the revision within three months and granted a one‑month status‑quo, which subsequently lapsed as the State failed to fix a hearing date. The applicants filed multiple applications requesting an extension of the status‑quo and urging the State to hear the revision on merit, but received no response. The respondents, through their advocates, agreed to appear before the State authority on 2 July 2026 and to have the matter heard or a further date fixed. The Court, to avoid further applications, ordered that the parties appear on that date, the State must decide the revision within three months thereafter, and the status‑quo will remain in force until disposal of the revision proceedings. The civil application was consequently disposed.

Issues considered

Whether the Court can extend the status‑quo pending the decision of a revision petition before a State authority.
Whether the Court may direct the State authority to fix a hearing date and decide the revision within a specified period.
Whether further relief beyond the prayer clause (B) can be entertained.

Subjects

status quo
revision petition
writ petition
direction to administrative authority
delay in administrative proceedings
court‑ordered hearing

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:22073

1-CA.5706.2026.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5706 OF 2026
IN
CIVIL APPLICATION NO._____ OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.3004 OF 2024

Rajhoji s/o. Narayan Jaybhayee
and others ..Applicants
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra
and others ..Respondents

----
Mr.Shivprasad G. Jadhavar, Advocate for applicants
Mr.S.G.Sangle, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 6
Mr.S.S.Kurundkar and Mr.Sanket Kulkarni, Advocates for respondent
no.7
----

CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATE : JUNE 05, 2026
(Vacation Court)
ORDER :-

A revision/appellate proceedings filed by the

applicants/petitioners is pending before the State authorities since

long. The applicants/petitioners had previously approached this court

vide Writ Petition No.3004 of 2024 for substantive reliefs. However,

when the matter was taken up for hearing on 13.03.2026, the

applicants/petitioners made a reasonable limited prayer to direct the

State authorities to decide the proceedings on its own merits within a
2 1-CA.5706.2026

time frame manner and to grant at least status quo till disposal of

the revision/appellate proceedings. This Court while disposing of the

said Writ Petition on 13.03.2026 directed the State authorities to

decide the Revision Petition pending before it, within three months.

While passing such order, status quo was issued for one month. After

passing of this order, the applicants/petitioners had been to the

State authorities on 06.04.2026 with a request to fix a date for

hearing in the proceedings and to conclude it on merit.

2. Mr.S.G.Jadhavar, learned counsel for the

applicants/petitioners submits that no hearing was concluded

thereafter. The applicants/petitioners again on 08.04.2026 filed

another application and requested the State authorities to take up

the Revision Proceedings and the application for stay for hearing on

merits. Even, that application was not heard. The same request was

advanced by the applicants/petitioners to the State authorities on

16.04.2026 which was also not paid any heed by the State

authorities. The applicants/petitioners, who apprehended

discontinuation of status quo order, and delay in this proceedings,

rushed this court vide Civil Application No.4740 of 2026 in Writ

Petition No.3004 of 2024. After hearing the parties, this court passed

the following order:-
3 1-CA.5706.2026

4. The Advocate for the Applicants submits
that, the order of status quo be extended for a
further period of two months.

5. The Application is opposed by the learned
Advocate for the other-side.

6. Since this Court, by the above referred
order, directed the State Authorities to decide the
Revision within a period of three months after all
concerned parties have been duly served, the
Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause
(B). No further prayer for extension of the status
quo order would be entertained.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants/petitioners further

submits that after the order dated 28.04.2026, the

applicants/petitioners again approached the State authorities on

07.05.2026 thereby requesting that the time granted by this court to

decide the Revision Proceedings is soon to lapse. The

applicants/petitioners thereby again requested to take up the

Revision Application for hearing. Learned counsel submits that no

date for hearing was fixed by the State authorities nor any order was

passed on the stay application. He would submit that it is apparent

that the applicants/petitioners would again loose the status quo and

the proceedings would remain pending at the whims and wishes of

the State authorities. By way of the present application, the
4 1-CA.5706.2026

applicants/petitioners seek directions to continue the status-quo till

disposal of the Revision Proceedings before the State authorities.

4. Learned AGP for respondent nos.1 to 6 would submit that

he will intimate the State authorities to comply with the directions

issued by this court. He submits that in any condition, the Revision

Proceedings would be decided within a period of three months. He

submits that due to the unavoidable circumstances, the Revision

proceedings could not be taken up for hearing by the State

authorities. He would submit that if a specific date is fixed by this

court, both the parties would appear before the State authorities.

This suggestion is agreed by the learned counsel for the respective

parties.

5. In view of the above and to avoid further filing of Civil

Applications for the same prayer, I deem it appropriate to pass the

following order:-

ORDER

(i) As per the agreed terms by the parties, they shall appear

before the State authority on 02.07.2026. On that day, the State
5 1-CA.5706.2026

authority shall either hear the parties on merit or fix a further date of

hearing.

(ii) In any case, the State authority shall decide the Revision

proceedings within a period of three months as a last chance, from

the date of appearance of the parties.

(iii) Till disposal of the Revision proceedings, there shall be

status-quo as regards the subject-matter mutation entry.

(iv) The Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly.

[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]

………..
KBP

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…