Bombay High Court

YASHWANRAO CHAVHAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT MISSION HINGOLI THR ITS SECRETARY PRASHANTversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND ANOTHER

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court held that the State must decide the petitioner's proposal within eight weeks and cannot reject it on the same ground previously raised.

Summary

The petitioner, Yashwanrao Chavhan Rural Development Mission Hingoli, submitted a revised proposal to the State of Maharashtra on 24 April 2026 after addressing deficiencies noted by the respondents. Despite the submission, the State (respondent No.1) failed to respond to the proposal. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a directive for the State to decide on the proposal. The Court examined whether the State was obligated to act within a reasonable time and whether it could reject the proposal on the same grounds previously raised. It held that the State must decide the proposal within eight weeks of receiving the order and may not turn it down on the same ground. Accordingly, the writ petition was partly allowed, directing the State to communicate its decision within the stipulated period.

Issues considered

Whether the State is bound to decide the petitioner's proposal within a reasonable time under the writ jurisdiction.
Whether the State can reject the revised proposal on the same ground as earlier deficiencies.

Subjects

writ petition
administrative law
proposal submission
decision within time
state liability

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:40333-DB


                                                1                   15-WP-11080-26.odt


                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              WRIT PETITION NO. 11080 OF 2026

               YASHWANRAO CHAVHAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT MISSION HINGOLI
                                     THROUGH ITS SECRETARY
                                              VERSUS
                  THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
                                             ANOTHER
                                                ...
              Mr. Pramod C. Mayure, Advocate for the Petitioner
              Mr. S. S. Joshi, AGP for Respondents/State
                                                ...

                                       CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                               ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
                                        DATE : 02nd SEPTEMBER, 2026

              PER COURT :

              1.            Petitioner has submitted proposal to respondent No.2 on

              24/04/2026 (page No.149) after removing the deficiencies pointed

              out by the respondents vide letter at page No.146. However, till

              date there is no response from respondent No.1 in respect of said

              proposal.

              2.            In this view of the matter, the writ petition is partly

              allowed. Respondent No.1 shall decide the proposal submitted by

              the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt

              of copy of this order. The said proposal shall not be turned down on

              the same ground and the decision shall be communicated to the

              petitioner.



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



              SVH

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…