Bombay High Court
AMRUTA BHALCHANDRA THORATversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court directed Respondent No.3 to decide on the petitioner’s proposal within eight weeks and communicate the decision.
Summary
The petitioner, Amruta Bhalchandra Thorat, filed a writ petition seeking a directive that Respondent No.3 decide on her proposal dated 21 January 2026. The High Court examined whether it could compel the respondent to make a decision on the merits within a specified timeframe. Relying on its inherent powers under Article 226, the Court held that it could issue such a direction to ensure administrative action. Consequently, the Court ordered Respondent No.3 to decide on the proposal within eight weeks of receiving the order and to communicate the decision to the petitioner. The petition was thus disposed of with the said direction.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate judicial remedy to compel Respondent No.3 to decide on the petitioner’s proposal?
Subjects
- writ petition
- administrative law
- direction
- decision on proposal
- High Court of Bombay
- Article 226
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:42603-DB
wp11358-26.doc
drp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.12358 OF 2026
Amruta Bhalchandra Thorat PETITIONER
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra and Others RESPONDENTS
.......
Mr. Ramesh I. Wakade, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondent - State
....…
[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, &
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. J.]
DATE : 15th SEPTEMBER, 2026
ORDER :
The Writ Petition is disposed of by directing Respondent
No.3 to take decision on the proposal of the Petitioner dated 21 st
January, 2026 on its own merits, within a period of 8 weeks from
the date of receipt of copy of this order and communicate the
decision to the Petitioner.
[ ABASAHEB D. SHINDE ] [ NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ]
JUDGE JUDGE
drp/wp11358-26.doc
Checking your session…