Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

RAMJI THAVARA RATHOD AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court held that the order dated 07‑05‑2026 in Writ Petition No. 2087 of 2016 governs the present petitions and no further directions are required.

Summary

The petitioners filed several writ petitions (Nos. 2089, 2091, 2096, 3012, 3013 of 2016) seeking a mandatory direction that the State of Maharashtra frame a specific policy within a fixed timeline. They argued that the earlier order in Writ Petition No. 2087 of 2016, which dealt with a similar grievance, did not contain such a precise deadline. The State, through its Additional Government Pleader, contended that the earlier order already addressed all relevant aspects and no further directions were necessary. The Court examined the submissions and held that the detailed order dated 07‑05‑2026 in Writ Petition No. 2087 of 2016 fully covers the issues raised in the present petitions. Consequently, the Court found no need for additional or modified directions and disposed of the petitions by referring them to the earlier order.

Issues considered

  • Whether the order passed in Writ Petition No. 2087 of 2016 is applicable to the present group of writ petitions.
  • Whether the State should be directed to frame the required policy within a specific timeline beyond the earlier order.

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • policy framing
  • state government
  • judicial review
  • group litigation
  • directions
  • public policy

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:21075-DB


                                          *1*                 913wp2089o16 grp


                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             WRIT PETITION NO. 2089 OF 2016
                          RAMJI THAVARA RATHOD AND OTHERS
                                       VERSUS
                        THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                         ...

                                         WITH
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 2091 OF 2016

                        DATTATRAYA BABAN SURWASE AND OTHERS
                                       VERSUS
                        THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                           …


                                         WITH
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 2096 OF 2016

                 SIDDHESHWAR DHARMAPPA BIRAJDAR AND OTHERS
                                    VERSUS
                     THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                           …


                                         WITH
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 3012 OF 2016

                 SHASHIKANT VIJAYKUMAR DHAYGUDE AND OTHERS
                                   VERSUS
                    THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                           …


                                         WITH
                             WRIT PETITION NO. 3013 OF 2016

                         BHIMRAO VINAYAK RATHOD AND OTHERS
                                       VERSUS
                        THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                           …
                               *2*                     913wp2089o16 grp


Shri N.P. Patil Jamalpurkar, advocate for the petitioners (through
VC).
Dr. Kalpalata Patil Bharaswadkar, Addl. GP for respondent Nos.1
to 6/ State.
                                ...


                   CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT
                                    &
                              SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, JJ.

                   DATE : 08 May 2026

PER COURT (Per Sushil M. Ghodeswar, J.) :-

1.          The learned advocate for the petitioners submits that

the controversy involved in these petitions is identical to the

issue considered in the group of petitions led by Writ Petition

No.2087 of 2016 (Yuvraj S/o Santrao Bhole Vs. The State of

Maharashtra and others), decided by this Court on 07.05.2026. It

is submitted that these petitions were left out from the said group

and therefore, these petitions may also be disposed of in terms of

the order dated 07.05.2026.


2.          The learned advocate for the petitioners further

submits that the State Authorities may be directed to frame an

appropriate policy within a specific timeline instead of merely

directing the State to consider framing such policy. According to

him, unless a specific direction is issued, the issue may not
                                *3*                   913wp2089o16 grp


receive due attention at the hands of the State Government.


3.              The learned AGP opposes the aforesaid submission

and submits that this Court, while deciding Writ Petition No.2087

of 2016 and connected matters on 07.05.2026, has already

considered all relevant aspects and issued appropriate directions.

It is, therefore, submitted that no further or modified directions

are required.


4.              We have considered the submissions. We find that

the issue involved in the present petitions is squarely covered by

the detailed order dated 07.05.2026 passed in Writ Petition

No.2087 of 2016 and connected matters. The directions issued

therein shall govern these petitions also.


5.              So far as the submission regarding issuance of

further mandatory directions to the State Government for framing

policy within a particular timeline is concerned, we find that the

said aspect has already been considered while passing the order

dated 07.05.2026. The operative directions issued therein

adequately take care of the grievance raised by the petitioners.

Hence, no separate or additional directions are required to be

issued in these petitions.
                                    *4*                     913wp2089o16 grp


      6.          In view of the above, these Writ Petitions stand

      disposed of in terms of the order dated 07.05.2026 passed in Writ

      Petition No.2087 of 2016 and connected matters.




kps   (SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, J.)            (KISHORE C. SANT, J.)


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.