Bombay High Court

PRATHVIRAJ JAWAHARLAL SARDAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CHARITY COMMISSIONER AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: VIBHA KANKANWADI HITEN S VENEGAVKAR

Holding

The Court declined to impose a fixed one‑month deadline, directing the respondent to decide the revision as early as possible.

Summary

The petitioner, Prathviraj Jawaharlal Sarda, filed a writ petition seeking a court direction for Respondent No. 2 (the Charity Commissioner) to decide Revision No. 70 of 2025 within one month. The petition highlighted that the revision was filed on 1 July 2025 and that there were irregularities in attendance of parties and advocates during proceedings. The court noted the substantial pendency in Respondent No. 2's office and held that imposing a strict one‑month deadline was not feasible. It directed Respondent No. 2 to decide the revision as early as possible, without setting a fixed time limit, and allowed parties to seek expedited relief through a separate application if urgency arose. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can impose a mandatory one‑month deadline for the decision of a revision pending before a government office.

Subjects

writ petition
revision
direction
pendency
time limit
High Court

Judgment

                                1                        939WP1757.2026.odt


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                939 WRIT PETITION NO. 1757 OF 2026

                       Prathviraj Jawaharlal Sarda
                                VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Charity Commissioner And Others
                                 ...
Mr. Amol Ratan Gaikwad - Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. V. M. Kagne - AGP for State
                                 ...

                          CORAM :     SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI
                                              AND
                                      HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.

                          DATED :      17TH FEBRUARY, 2026

PER COURT : -

1.           The present petition has been filed seeking a direction to

Respondent No. 2 to decide Revision No. 70 of 2025 within a period of

one month.


2.           Heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner. The learned

AGP waives service of notice on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. There

is no necessity to issue notice to Respondent Nos. 4 to 17.


3.           The first and foremost fact that requires to be noted is that

the Revision before Respondent No. 2 appears to have been filed on 1 st

July, 2025. It appears that the other side appeared in the matter after

service of notice. A copy of the Roznama shows that, sometimes, the

advocates were present and the parties were absent, and at other times,
                                                             2                         939WP1757.2026.odt

                             the advocates themselves were absent. The learned Advocate for the

                             Petitioner is of the opinion that the stage now shown is for final hearing.


                             4.           Considering the huge pendency in the office of Respondent

                             No. 2, it is not feasible to issue a direction to decide the matter filed on

                             1st July, 2025 within a fixed time frame. However, we leave it to

                             Respondent No. 2 to decide the Revision as early as possible. We

                             reiterate that we are not imposing any time limit for the decision. If

                             there is any urgency, the parties may file a specific application to that

                             effect, and after hearing both sides on that application, Respondent No.

                             2 shall take a decision and decide the matter expeditiously.


                             5.           With the directions as above, Writ Petition stands disposed

                             of.




                              [HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR]                     [SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI]
                                     JUDGE                                       JUDGE




                             SG Punde




Signed by: Sandeep Gulabrao Punde
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 24/02/2026 18:24:19

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…