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.)
Checking your session…