Bombay High Court

GANGABHARATI MAHILA BACHAT GAT THROUGH ITS PRESIDENTversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: KISHORE C SANT SUSHIL M GHODESWAR

Holding

The petition is dismissed as the petitioner can avail the alternative remedy of appeal before the Commissioner.

Summary

The petitioners, Gangabharati Mahila Bachat Gat, filed a writ petition challenging the order of allotment of a fair price shop by the State of Maharashtra. The respondents argued that an alternative remedy existed in the form of an appeal before the Commissioner. The Court examined whether the writ petition was maintainable given the availability of this alternative remedy. It held that the petitioner should pursue the appeal before the Commissioner and that the writ petition was therefore not the appropriate forum. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to approach the Commissioner if it wishes to contest the order. The Court also noted that time spent on the writ petition would be excluded from limitation calculations.

Issues considered

Whether the writ petition challenging the order of allotment of a fair price shop is maintainable when an alternative remedy of appeal before the Commissioner is available

Subjects

writ petition
alternative remedy
fair price shop
limitation period
jurisdiction

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:12401-DB


                                                 1              37-wp 2269-2017.odt



                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                 WRIT PETITION NO. 2269 OF 2017

                 Gangabharati Mahila Bachat Gat
                 Through Its President                                     .. Petitioner

                        Versus

                 The State Of Maharashtra And Others                       .. Respondents

                 Mr. Hrishikesh A. Joshi, Advocate for Petitioner.
                 Mr. K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

                                          CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT AND
                                                  SUSHIL M. GHODESWAR, JJ.
                                          DATE       :   18th MARCH, 2026.

                 PER COURT :-

                 1.     The learned A.G.P. points out that, alternative remedy is

                 available by way of filing appeal before the Commissioner against

                 the impugned order of allotment of fair price shop.


                 2.     Considering above, this Court finds that, it would be

                 appropriate to avail alternative remedy.


                 3.     With this, the writ petition stands disposed of.


                 4.     The petitioner, if desires, may approach the Commissioner

                 by way of an appeal.
                               2            37-wp 2269-2017.odt


5.       Needless to say that, time spent in prosecuting this writ

petition shall be excluded while considering the period of

limitation.



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




P.S.B.

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…