Bombay High Court

ALKA RAJENDRA WAGHMARE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The writ petitions were dismissed, and the petitioners were directed to avail themselves of the alternate remedy.

Summary

The Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, heard two writ petitions filed by Alka Rajendra Waghmare et al. and Rajendra Ratnakar Waghmare against the State of Maharashtra. The Court observed that both petitions involved several disputed questions of fact, rendering them unsuitable for adjudication through a writ. Consequently, the Court declined to entertain the petitions and ordered that the petitioners may pursue the appropriate alternative remedy. No substantive merits of the claims were addressed. The petitions were therefore disposed of without any order on the relief sought.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition may be entertained when the matters raised involve disputed questions of fact

Subjects

writ petition
disputed facts
alternative remedy
high court disposal

Judgment

                                     {1}                   13-wp-10295-2026

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                              BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                       13 WRIT PETITION NO. 10295 OF 2026

                  Alka Rajendra Waghmare And Others
                                VERSUS
 The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Additional Chief Secretary And
                                 Others
                                   ...
Mr. Prateek Talwar, Advocate for the Petitioners
Mr. N.S. Tekale, AGP for State
Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for Respondents No. 3 and 4

                       18 WRIT PETITION NO. 10345 OF 2026

                     Rajendra Ratnakar Waghmare
                                VERSUS
      The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others
                                    ...
Mr. Prateek Talwar, Advocate for the Petitioners
Mr. N.D. Batule, AGP for State
Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for Respondents No. 3 and 4
                                  .......

                            CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                     ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
                               DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2026
PER COURT :

1.       Since both these petitions raise several disputed questions of

facts, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petitions.

2.       Writ Petitions are therefore disposed of by granting liberty to the

Petitioners to avail the alternate remedy.



(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.)                   (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)

Bhagyawant Punde

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…