Bombay High Court
MITHILESH GANESH RAJBHARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND 4 ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- M S KARNIKS M MODAK
Holding
The petition is disposed of as infructuous because the reliefs sought can no longer be granted.
Summary
Mithilesh Ganesh Rajbhar filed a writ petition (WP No.2318 of 2019) against the State of Maharashtra and other respondents seeking certain reliefs. The respondents argued that, owing to the lapse of time, the reliefs sought had become infructuous. The Court, after considering the counsel's submissions, held that the petition could no longer grant effective relief and therefore disposed of it as infructuous. However, the Court kept the petitioner's liberty to approach the Court again if the cause of action still subsists. All pending applications, if any, were also ordered disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the reliefs prayed for in the writ petition have become infructuous due to the passage of time
Subjects
- limitation
- infructuous relief
- writ petition
- civil procedure
- petition disposed
Judgment
5-WP-2318-2019+IA(L)-24373-2024+IPA(L)-24371-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.2318 OF 2019
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.24373 OF 2024
Digitally signed
SATISH
by SATISH
RAMCHANDRA
WITH
SANGAR
RAMCHANDRA
SANGAR Date:
2026.06.17
IN PERSON APPLICATION (L) NO.24371 OF 2024
17:13:03
+0530
Mithilesh Ganesh Rajbhar ...Petitioner/Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents
*****
None for the Petitioner/Applicant.
Mr.Suraj Gupte, AGP, for Respondents–State.
Mr.Girish Utangale i/b.Utangale and Company, Advocate for
Respondent No.5–SRA.
Mr.Akshay Pawar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.6,7 and 8
*****
CORAM : M.S.KARNIK &
S. M. MODAK, JJ.
DATE : 17th JUNE 2026
P. C. :-
1. None for the Petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for Respondent Nos.6,7 and 8 submits that in
view of the passage of time, the reliefs prayed for in this Petition
become infructuous. The Petition is, therefore, disposed of as
infructuous.
Satish Sangar 1/2
5-WP-2318-2019+IA(L)-24373-2024+IPA(L)-24371-2024.doc
3. Liberty to the Petitioner to apply is kept open in case, they are in
a position to satisfy that the cause for which the Petition was filed still
survives.
4. Pending Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
(S. M. MODAK, J.) (M. S. KARNIK, J.)
Satish Sangar 2/2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.