Bombay High Court

SHRIHARI YASHWANTRAO YEWALE AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The petitions are dismissed as there is no remaining relief after the payment of enhanced compensation.

Summary

The petitioners filed six continuous writ petitions (Nos. 184, 186, 187, 188, 189 and 200 of 2020) seeking enhanced compensation from the State of Maharashtra. The State had already paid the enhanced compensation to the petitioners before the hearing. The petitioners, through counsel, informed the Court that they had received the full amount and therefore had no further relief to claim. The Court examined whether any issue remained for adjudication after the payment. Finding that the relief sought was already satisfied, the Court held that there was nothing left to entertain. Consequently, the Court disposed of all the petitions. The judgment underscores that once the relief sought is fully granted, a writ petition becomes moot and is dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether the writ petitions remain maintainable after the petitioners have received the enhanced compensation sought from the State.

Subjects

writ petition
enhanced compensation
disposal
state liability
mootness

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:37442-DB

                                                                    902 to 907 184-20 .




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                         902 CONT. PETITION NO. 184 OF 2020
                                    IN WP/11891/2019
                            SUNIL SUDAM PARVE AND OTHERS
                                         VERSUS
                       THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                            ...
          Mr. Tungar Hrishikesh V. , Advocate for the Petitioners
          Mr. A. S. Shinde, AGP for Respondent-State
                                            ….
                                           AND
                         903 CONT. PETITION NO. 186 OF 2020
                                    IN WP/11887/2019

                       SITARAM SHRIMANT MASKE AND ANOTHER
                                          VERSUS
                        THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                             ...
          Mr. Tungar Hrishikesh V., Advocate for the Petitioners
          Mr. S. J. Salgare, AGP for Respondent-State
                                            …
                                           AND
                          904 CONT. PETITION NO. 187 OF 2020
                                     IN WP/11888/2019

                       MADHUKAR ASHRUBA MASKE AND OTHERS
                                          VERSUS
                       THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                             ...
          Mr. Tungar Hrishikesh V. , Advocate for the Petitioners
          Mr. N. B. Patil, AGP for Respondent-State
                                             …
                                            AND
                           905 CONT. PETITION NO. 188 OF 2020
                                     IN WP/11889/2019
                    SHRIHARI YASHWANTRAO YEWALE AND ANOTHER
                                          VERSUS
                      THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                             ...
          Mr. Tungar Hrishikesh V. , Advocate for the Petitioners
          Ms. Uma S. Bhosale, AGP for Respondent-State
                                             …
                  VS Maind/                                     Page|1
                                                                 902 to 907 184-20 .




                                   AND
                    906 CONT. PETITION NO. 189 OF 2020
                            IN WP/11886/2019

                   SHAHURAO BABURAO KOLHE
                               VERSUS
            THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                  ...
Mr. Tungar Hrishikesh V. , Advocate for the Petitioners
Ms. M. N. Ghanekar AGP for Respondent-State
                                  …
                                 AND
              907 CONT. PETITION NO. 200 OF 2020
                         IN WP/11890/2019

             NAVNATH JAGNNATH MASKE AND OTHERS
                               VERSUS
             THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                  ...
Mr. Tungar Hrishikesh V. , Advocate for the Petitioners
Mr. G. A. Kulkarni, AGP for Respondent-State
                                  ...
                       CORAM         : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE &
                                        VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ.

                           Date       :   19/08/2026

PER COURT :


     Learned counsel for the petitioners in all these petitions, on
instructions, submits that the petitioners have already received the
amount of enhanced compensation. As such, nothing survives in these
petitions. Accordingly, all these petitions stand disposed of.




[VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV]                       [SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE]
             JUDGE                                  JUDGE


        VS Maind/                                            Page|2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…