Bombay High Court
SADGURU HAMAL KAMGAR SAHAKARI SANSTHA LTD THROUGH AUTHORISED SIGNATORY V N PEDGULWARversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court held that the amendment seeking to challenge the petitioner’s disqualification may be permitted and ordered the civil application allowed, directing the petitioner to amend the writ petition by 10 June 2026.
Summary
The applicant, Sadguru Hamal Kamgar Sahakari Sanstha Ltd., sought to amend its writ petition after the respondents disqualified it during the pendency of the case. The applicant argued that the Union of India, though named as a respondent, was not a contesting party and that the main liability lay with the State authorities. The Union of India contended that it had not received the copies of the civil application. The court considered whether the amendment could be allowed despite the service issue and the disqualification. It held that the amendment was appropriate and allowed the civil application, directing the applicant to file an amended writ petition by 10 June 2026 and to serve the amended copy to the respondents.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner may amend the writ petition to challenge its disqualification during pendency of the proceedings.
- Whether the Union of India, though named as a respondent, is a contesting party for the purposes of service and amendment.
- Whether the alleged non‑receipt of the civil application copies by the Union of India bars the amendment.
Subjects
- amendment
- writ petition
- disqualification
- service of notice
- civil application
- High Court
- jurisdiction
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:22072-DB
2-ca5743.2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.5743 OF 2026
IN WRIT PETITION NO.5296 OF 2026
Sadguru Hamal Kamgar Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. ..Applicant
Vs.
Union of India and others ..Respondents
----
Mr.U.R.Awate i/b.M/s. Talekar and Associates for applicant
Mr.Akshay Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent no.1
Mr.V.V.Jahagirdar, AGP for respondent nos.2 and 3
----
CORAM : AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
DATE : JUNE 05, 2026
(Vacation Court)
ORDER :-
Mr.U.R.Awate, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner
submits that during pendency of the Writ Petition there is a
development in the facts. He would submit that in the meantime, the
respondents/authorities have disqualified the applicant/petitioner. In
view of that, he submits that it has become incumbent on the part of
the applicant to amend the Writ Petition so as to challenge the said
disqualification and also to add the necessary parties.
2. Although the applicant/petitioner demonstrates that the
copies of the Civil Application are served to the office of the
Government Pleader and the Union of India well in advance i.e. on
2 2-ca5743.2026
02.06.2026, Mr.Akshay Kulkarni, learned counsel for the respondent –
Union of India submits that the copies are not received by his office.
3. Mr.Awate, learned counsel for the applicants would
submit that the Union of India is not a contesting party although it is
arrayed as respondent no.1. He submits that it is the State
authorities and particularly the respondent no.2 who is the main
contesting party and predominantly answerable in the Writ Petition.
4. Learned AGP would fairly submit that appropriate order
may be passed in the Civil Application.
5. Considering that the amendment sought to be made is
about the applicant/petitioner’s disqualification during pendency of
this Writ Petition, I deem it appropriate to allow the Civil Application.
6. Hence, the Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer
clause (A). The applicant/petitioner to amend the Writ Petition
memo on or before the due date i.e. 10.06.2026. Copies of the
amended Writ Petition compilation be served in advance to learned
counsel for the respondents – Union of India and State Authorities.
[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]
………..
KBP
Checking your session…