Bombay High Court
SAMUDRA BAR AND RESTAURANTversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR OFFICE OF GOVT PLEADER AD ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The writ petition is not maintainable as the statutory remedy has been invoked, but the Court directs an expeditious hearing of the appeal.
Summary
The petitioner, M/s. Samudra Bar and Restaurant, challenged an order dated 3 September 2026 by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Brihanmumbai, which cancelled its entertainment licence to operate an orchestra under Rules 238 and 239 of the Entertainment Rules, 1960. The petitioner argued that it had already filed an appeal before the designated Appellate Authority and therefore sought a stay of the cancellation pending that appeal. The Court held that because a statutory remedy was available and had been invoked, the writ petition was not maintainable, but it was in the interest of justice to ensure the appeal was decided expeditiously. Accordingly, the petition was disposed of, with a direction to the respondent to decide the appeal within four weeks and for the petitioner to appear before the Appellate Authority on 28 September 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition is maintainable when the petitioner has invoked the statutory remedy under the Entertainment Rules, 1960.
- Whether a stay of the licence cancellation order is warranted pending the decision of the appeal before the Appellate Authority.
Legislation cited
- Entertainment Rules, 1960 — s. Rule 238, Rule 239
Subjects
- entertainment licence
- cancellation
- statutory remedy
- writ petition
- stay of order
- appellate authority
- Bombay High Court
Judgment
43 wp 12494 of 2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.12494 OF 2026
M/s. Samudra Bar and Restaurant ... Petitioner
versus
State of Maharashtra and Ors. … Respondents
Mr. R.D.Soni with Ms. Sujay Gawade, Ms. Mudita Pawar, Ms. Mihika Save
i/by Shree and Co., for Petitioner.
Mr. P.G.Sawant, AGP for State.
CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J.
DATE : 21 SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
2. The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 3 September 2026
passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Brihanmumbai, thereby
SWAROOP
SHARAD
PHADKE cancelling the entertainment licence of the Petitioner to operate an Orchestra
Digitally signed by
SWAROOP
SHARAD PHADKE
Date: 2026.09.25 in the subject premises under the provisions of Rule 238 and 239 of the
11:19:54 +0530
Entertainment Rules, 1960.
3. Mr. Soni, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that, the Petitioner
has availed the statutory remedy by filing an appeal before the Appellate
Authority. However, in the intervening period, the execution and operation of
the impugned order deserves to be stayed.
4. As the Petitioner has already invoked the statutory remedy, there is no
propriety in entertaining this Petition. However, it may be expedient in the
SSP 1/2
43 wp 12494 of 2026.doc
interest of justice that the said appeal is decided as expeditiously as possible.
5. Hence, the Writ Petition stands disposed with a request to the
Respondent No.2 to decide the appeal filed by the Petitioner, as expeditiously
as possible and, preferably, within a period of four weeks from the
appearance of the Petitioner before the Appellate Authority.
6. The Petitioner shall appear before the Appellate Authority on 28
September 2026.
( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )
SSP 2/2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.