Bombay High Court
KALYAN VAIJINATH KALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The petition is dismissed as infructuous; no direction to reschedule the meeting is issued.
Summary
Kalyan Vaijinath Kale, a Member of Parliament and member of the District Planning Committee (DPC) of Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, filed a writ petition seeking to quash a letter dated 04.02.2026 that directed the rescheduling of a DPC meeting scheduled for 12.02.2026, arguing that the meeting conflicted with the Parliament session. The petition was filed after the meeting had already taken place. The Court held that the matter was infructuous because the meeting had been held and therefore no relief could be granted. The Court declined to issue any blanket direction for future meetings, noting there was no mala fides in holding the meeting and that administrative considerations near the end of the financial year justified the timing. Consequently, the petition was disposed of as infructuous.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, can be granted when a petition seeks to quash a directive to reschedule a meeting that has already been held?
- Can the Court issue a blanket direction for future scheduling of District Planning Committee meetings to avoid conflicts with Parliament sessions?
Subjects
- writ petition
- district planning committee
- infructuous
- high court
- administrative law
- meeting scheduling
- parliament session
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:12155-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1704 OF 2026
Kalyan Vaijinath Kale
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others
Mr. P. D. Jarare, Advocate for petitioner
Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for respondent-State
CORAM : Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi &
Hiten S. Venegavkar, JJ.
DATE : 18th March, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Present petition was filed for quashing and setting aside the
impugned letter dated 04.02.2026 issued by respondent No. 2 and to
direct the respondent No. 2 to reschedule the District Planning
Committee Meeting dated 12.02.2026.
2. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner who is a member of Parliament is also the member of the
District Planning Committee, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and since the
parliament was in session and the meeting was to be held on
12.02.2026, he has filed the present petition; however, the said meeting
is over.
3. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the matter has become
929-WP-1704-2026.odt 1 of 2
infructuous in view of the fact that the meeting dated 12.02.2026 went
ahead.
4. The learned Advocate for the petitioner still want to contend
that in future the respondent No. 2 reschedule the meeting when the
parliament is not in session.
5. We cannot issue a blanket directions. It is thus, for the
convenience of all. The meeting will have to be held and we cannot
presume that in future any such incident would happen. Secondly, we are
also observing that when it comes to the period near the end of financial
year then certainly the Government Officers would be in a hurry to
recapitulate as how much amount is left for spending and then would
take up those works which can be completed within the said financial
year. Under such circumstance, we do not find that there was some
malafide in holding the meeting on 12.02.2026.
6. We dispose of the writ petition as has become infructuous.
(Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.) (Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.)
B. S. Joshi
929-WP-1704-2026.odt 2 of 2
Checking your session…