Bombay High Court

DATTA BASWANTRAO PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: N B SURYAWANSHI VAISHALI PATIL JADHAV

Holding

The Court held that the respondent must decide the pending revision within eight weeks of the order, after granting a hearing.

Summary

The petitioner, Datta Baswantrao Patil, filed a writ petition alleging that a revision application (Revision No.708/2015) pending before the State of Maharashtra had not been decided for 11 years. The petitioner sought direction for the respondent to decide the revision promptly. The High Court examined the grievance of undue delay in adjudicating the revision. The Court found that such delay was unacceptable and ordered the respondent to decide the pending revision within eight weeks, after providing a hearing to the parties. Additionally, the Court directed that a notice of hearing be issued to the petitioner within two weeks. The order aims to ensure timely disposal of the pending revision.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate remedy for an 11-year delay in deciding a pending revision application?

Subjects

writ petition
revision
delay in adjudication
high court
procedural law
court order

Judgment

                                   1

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

                 903 WRIT PETITION NO. 1934 OF 2019

Datta Baswantrao Patil                                       ..Petitioner
      Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others                          ..Respondents
                                …..
Ms. A. N. Ansari, Advocate for the Petitioner
Shri. P. K. Lakhotiya, AGP for the State.
                                    …..

                              CORAM :      N. B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                           VAISHALI PATIL – JADHAV, JJ.
                              Dated     : MARCH 18, 2026

PER COURT :-

.     It is the grievance of the Petitioner that, Revision No.708/2015
has still not been decided by Respondent No.1. If it is so, it is really
sorry state of affairs that in spite of 11 years, still the revision is not yet
decided.


2.    If the Revision is not already decided, Respondent No.1 to decide
the same within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of
writ of this order, after giving opportunity of hearing to the concerned
parties. Petitioner shall be issued notice of hearing within two (2) weeks
from the date of receipt of writ of this order.




(VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J.)                    (N. B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)


GGP

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…