Bombay High Court

ARIF GAFFAR MEMON AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. GOVT PLEADER AND ORS

Decided: 30 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

No coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners until the AGRC passes and communicates its final order.

Summary

The petitioners, Arif Gaffar Memon and another, challenged an order dated 11 September 2026 in which the AGRC declined to grant interim relief. The petition sought to restrain any coercive action against them pending the final order of the appeal (No. 319/2026) before the AGRC. The High Court observed that the appeal had already been finally heard and was closed for orders, and therefore, until the final order is passed and communicated, no coercive action could be taken against the petitioners. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition. The decision rests on procedural propriety that interim relief cannot be granted when the appellate authority has already concluded the hearing and is awaiting its final order.

Issues considered

What is the effect of an AGRC order declining interim relief on the permissibility of coercive action against petitioners before the final order is communicated?

Subjects

interim relief
writ petition
AGRC
coercive action
final order

Judgment

                                                                       901-WP12613-2026.DOC

                                                                                     Santosh

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                        WRIT PETITION NO. 12613 OF 2026

                      Arif Gaffar Memon And Anr                               ...Petitioners
                                       Versus
                      The State Of Maharashtra Through Govt
                      Pleader And Ors                                        …Respondents

                      Mr. A. N. Giri, a/w Sagar Batavia, for the Petitioners.
                      Ms. Dharani Divekar, a/w Nishi Naval,i/b R. S. Juslicia Law
                            Chambers, for SRA & AGRC.
                      Mr. Ranjeev Carvalho, i/b Siddharth Sharma, for Respondent
                            No.4.
SANTOSH               Mr. S. H. Kankal, AGP for the State – Respondent No.1.
SUBHASH
KULKARNI
Digitally signed by                                  CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J.
SANTOSH SUBHASH
KULKARNI
Date: 2026.10.01
                                                     DATED: 30th SEPTEMBER, 2026
17:37:06 +0530


                      PC:-

                      1.      Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners.


                      2.      The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 11 th

                      September, 2026, whereby the AGRC has declined to grant ad-

                      interim relief.


                      3.      By the said order itself the AGRC has recorded that the

                      appeal has been finally heard and closed for orders.


                      4.      In these circumstances, since the AGRC has already heard

                      the appeal finally and closed it for orders, till the passing of the

                      final   order and     its   communication   to   the    petitioners   –

                                                       1/2
                                              901-WP12613-2026.DOC

appellants, no coercive action be taken against the petitioners,

pursuant   to   the   order   which   is   impugned   in   Appeal

No.319/2026, which awaits verdict by the AGRC.


5.   The petition stands disposed.


                                           [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




                               2/2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

S H Kankal