Bombay High Court
PRASHANT SHAMRAO SHELAKEversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND 3 ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, as the petitioner is permitted to pursue the alternative remedy and has elected to withdraw the petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Prashant Shamrao Shelake, challenged the appointment of Respondent No.3 as Sports Inspector, alleging that the appointment document was fabricated and that he lost his chance for the post. The High Court initially held that the writ petition was not maintainable and directed the petitioner to approach the appropriate tribunal. The petitioner’s counsel reiterated the claim of fraud but maintained that the alternative remedy remained the proper avenue, and subsequently sought to withdraw the petition. The Court, considering the counsel’s request, allowed the withdrawal and dismissed the petition as withdrawn without addressing the merits. No substantive examination of the alleged fraud or the appointment process was undertaken.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition challenging a public service appointment is maintainable when an alternative remedial forum exists
- Whether the petitioner may withdraw the writ petition after the Court’s initial order
Subjects
- appointment
- sports inspector
- writ petition
- maintainability
- alternative remedy
- withdrawal
- public service
- fraudulent document
Judgment
12. CIVIL WP-1142-2026.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1142 OF 2026
Prashant Shamrao Shelake .. Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents
....................
Mr. Rugwed R. Kinkar, Advocate for Petitioner
Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for State
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV &
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : JUNE 22, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Kinkar, learned Advocate for Petitioner and Ms. Kapre
learned AGP for State.
2. On 19.06.2026, this Court passed the following order:-
"1. Petitioner is aggrieved with the appointment of Respondent No.3 as
Sports Inspector. The Petitioner has lost his chance to be appointed on that
post. Being disgruntled, the petition is filed.
2. Writ petition is not maintainable. The alternate efficacious remedy
available to the Petitioner is to approach the concerned tribunal or forum
and not by way of a writ petition. Mr. Kinkar will take appropriate
instructions from the Petitioner and accordingly apprise the Court. If the
Petitioner is willing to approach the concerned tribunal or forum, we will
permit the Petitioner to do so keeping all his contentions open, without
opining anything on the merits of the matter. List on 22nd June 2026 (First
on Board), for passing orders."
3. Mr. Kinkar would in his usual fair mindedness informs the Court
that he has taken appropriate instructions but would still submit that
the document under which Respondent No. 3 has been appointed as
1 of 2
12. CIVIL WP-1142-2026.odt
Sports Inspector is a fabricated and fraudulent document. In view of
our observations in the previous order, we are not inclined to entertain
the present Petition. The alternate efficacious remedy available to the
Petitioner is to approach the concerned tribunal or forum and not by
way of a writ petition. By reserving such liberty to Petitioner, Petition
is dismissed.
4. At this stage, Mr. Kinkar interjects and on instructions seeks
leave to withdraw the Petition with such liberty. In view of the above
submissions made by Mr. Kinkar, we are inclined to allow him to
withdraw the present Petition. Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.
[ NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J. ] [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Amberkar
2 of 2
Checking your session…