Bombay High Court

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

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: NEERAJ P DHOTE

Holding

The court allowed the application to extend the status‑quo order for one month, but declined to consider any further extension.

Summary

The petitioners sought an extension of the status‑quo order originally dated 01‑04‑2024 for an additional month, arguing that the revision petition before the Revenue Minister had been pending since 16‑01‑2024 and required a time‑bound decision. The court had earlier directed the State authorities to decide the revision within three months after all parties were served and had kept the status‑quo in force for one month. The respondents opposed any further extension. The court held that, given its earlier direction for a three‑month decision period, the petitioners' request for a one‑month extension of the status‑quo was permissible, but no further extension would be entertained. Consequently, the application was allowed in accordance with prayer clause (B).

Issues considered

Whether the status‑quo order dated 01‑04‑2024 can be extended for an additional month.
Whether the court can entertain any further extension beyond the one‑month period.

Subjects

status quo
interim order
revision application
extension of order
High Court of Bombay
writ petition
justice

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:19100
                                                                          969wp4740-26

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            969 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4740 OF 2026
                                        IN WP/3004/2024

                             Rajhoji Narayan Jaybhayee And Others
                                           VERSUS
             The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And Others
                                               ...
            Mr. Jadhavar Shivprasad G., Advocate for Applicants
            Mr. N. D. Batule, AGP for Respondents State
            Mr. Sameer S. Kurandkar, Advocate for Respondent No.6


                                     CORAM : NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.
                                       Dated : 28th April, 2026

            PER COURT :-

            1.         This is an Application for the following prayer.


                 "(B) The Hon'ble Court by its order dated 13.03.2026 continued the
                      interim order dated 01.04.2024 for a period of one months and
                      the same may kindly be extended for a period of one month, in
                      the interest of justice necessary order."

            2.         It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Applicants that

            the proceedings are pending before the Hon'ble Minister which are

            directed to be decided within a period of three (3) months after all the

            concerned parties are duly served.


            3.         The order dated 13.03.2026 reads as under:


                      ". Mr. S. G. Jadhavar, learned Counsel for the petitioners
                      would submit that the Revision Application filed by the
                      petitioners before the Hon’ble Minister Revenue is
                      pending since 16.01.2024. He prays for a limited relief to


                                                                                   1 of 2
                                                                      969wp4740-26

                   direct the State Authorities to decide the pending
                   Revision within a time bound manner.

                   2.    Mr. S. S. Kulkarni, learned Counsel for respondent
                   no.7 and Mr. S. D. Ghayal, learned Addl. AGP have no
                   objection to such limited relief.

                   3.     Accordingly, Writ Petition is disposed of with a
                   direction to the State Authorities to decide the Revision
                   Petition filed by the petitioners within a period of three
                   months after all concerned parties have been duly served.
                   Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

                   4.    Status-quo granted by this Court vide order dated
                   01.04.2024 shall remain in force for further period of one
                   month.


           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.




                                                           (NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.)

JPChavan




                                                                                2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…