Bombay High Court

M/S. HOTEL SAMIT PUNJAB THR PROP. DEEPA R TYAGIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

Decided: 29 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The writ petition is not maintainable because the suspension period has expired and the petitioner has already invoked the statutory appeal.

Summary

The petitioner, M/s Hotel Samit Punjab, challenged a suspension order of its orchestra licence issued under Rules 238 and 239 of the Public Amusement Rules, 1999. The suspension was for 20 days starting 31 July 2026, a period which had already elapsed by the time of the hearing. The petitioner had already filed a statutory appeal and a stay application, but the appeal had not yet been heard. The State argued that the existence of the statutory remedy barred the writ petition. The Court held that, since the suspension period was over and the petitioner had invoked the statutory appeal, the writ petition was not maintainable. Consequently, the petition was disposed and the Court directed the appellate authority to hear the pending appeal within eight weeks.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition challenging a licence suspension is maintainable when the statutory appeal against the suspension has already been filed and the suspension period has expired.

Subjects

licence suspension
public amusement rules
statutory appeal
writ petition
maintainability
administrative law

Judgment

2026:BHC-AS:36307
                                                                       34-WP-11243-2026.DOC




                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                  WRIT PETITION NO. 11243 OF 2026


               M/s Hotel Samit Punjab Through Prop Deepa R                  ..Petitioner
               Tyagi
                     Versus
               State of Maharashtra And Ors                             …Respondents

               Mr. R.D. Soni, with S.N. Gawade, i/b Shree & Co, for the Petitioner.
               Mr. P.G. Sawant, AGP, for the Respondents-State.

                                             CORAM:         N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                                             DATE :         29th AUGUST 2026


               P.C.:

               1.      Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

               2.      The challenge in this Petition is to an order dated 31 July 2026

               passed by the Respondent No.4, whereby in exercise of the powers

               under Rules 238 and 239 of the Rules for Licensing and Controlling

               places of Public Amusement (other than Cinemas) and Performances

               (including Melas and Tamashas), 1999 (the Public Amusement Rules,

               1999), the Respondent No.4 has suspended the licence of the Petitioner

               to operate the orchestra for a period of 20 days from the date of the

               said order.

               3.      The learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner

               has already filed a statutory appeal against the said order along with an
               ARS                                    1/2
                                                                                     34-WP-11243-2026.DOC

                           application for stay to the impugned order. However, the said appeal is

                           not taken up for hearing by Respondent No.2.

                           4.         Learned AGP for the Respondent-State submitted that, as the

                           Petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy of appeal, this

                           Petition does not deserve to be entertained.

                           5.         This Court finds that, by the impugned order dated 31 July 2026,

                           the Competent Authority has suspended the entertainment licence to

                           operate an orchestra for a period of 20 days.          The said period has

                           already expired. Since the Petitioner claims to have already availed the

                           remedy of appeal and the suspension period is also over, at this stage,

                           there is no propriety in entertaining this Petition.

                           6.         The Writ Petition stands disposed with a request to the Appellate

                           Authority to hear and decide the Appeal preferred by the Petitioner, as

                           expeditiously as possible, and, preferably, within a period of 8 weeks

                           from 7 September 2026.

                           7.         The Petitioner shall appear before the Appellate Authority on 7

                           September 2026.



                                                                          [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




Signed by: S.S.Phadke       ARS                                     2/2
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 03/09/2026 21:50:36

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…