Bombay High Court

ANIL POPAT RAUT AND ORSversusTHE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND ORS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: S G CHAPALGAONKAR

Holding

The Court held that the writ petition is infructuous and must be dismissed because it was filed after the lapse of time.

Summary

The petitioners, Anil Popat Raut and others, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging actions of the Sub Divisional Officer and other respondents. The petition was presented by Mr. Abhijit S. More. The respondents were represented by Ms. R. R. Tandale (AGP for the State) and Ms. Pratiksha C. Kale (for respondents Nos. 4 to 7). The petitioners argued that their relief should be granted, but the Court noted that the petition had been filed after the prescribed period had elapsed. Relying on the principle that a petition that has lost its temporal relevance is infructuous, the Court dismissed the petition. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of as infructuous.

Issues considered

Whether the writ petition is maintainable despite the lapse of the prescribed time.

Subjects

Writ Petition
Limitation
Efflux of Time
High Court
Infructuous Petition

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:23799
                                             (1)                  958-wp-3011-2026.odt



                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 3011 OF 2026

                                 ANIL POPAT RAUT AND ORS
                                           VERSUS
                          THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND ORS
                                                ...
               Mr. Abhijit S. More, Advocate for the Petitioners.
               Ms. R. R. Tandale, AGP for Respondents-State.
               Ms. Pratiksha C. Kale, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 to 7.
                                                ...
                                        CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
                                        DATED : 17th JUNE, 2026.
               P.C.:-

               1.      Mr. More, learned Advocate appearing for petitioners
               submits that by efflux of time, prayers in Writ Petition does not
               survive.


               2.      In that view of matter, Writ Petition stands disposed of as
               infructuous.


                                                     (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
                                                              JUDGE
               Devendra/June-2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…