Bombay High Court

The President Dhantara Social FoundationversusThe Administrative Officer

Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court ordered Respondent No.3 to decide the representation expeditiously.

Summary

The Presidents of Sankalpa Swayamrojgar Sahakari Sanstha and Dhantara Social Foundation filed writ petitions against the Administrative Officer, Primary Education Committee, Municipal Corporation, Kolhapur and others, seeking a court order directing Respondent No.3 to decide a representation they had made after filing the petitions. The petitioners argued that the representation remained undecided and required judicial intervention. The court examined whether it could compel the administrative authority to act on the pending representation. Finding no impediment, the bench directed Respondent No.3 to decide the representation expeditiously. Accordingly, the petitions were disposed with the said direction.

Issues considered

Whether the High Court can direct Respondent No.3 to decide the pending representation filed by the petitioners

Subjects

writ petition
administrative law
representation
direction
expeditious decision
municipal corporation

Judgment

                                                    37-39-WP-2925-3042-2026.doc


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                   (37) WRIT PETITION NO. 2925 OF 2026

The President,
Sankalpa Swayamrojgar Sahakari
Sanstha, Sangli.                        ...Petitioner.
        Versus
The Administrative Oicer,
Primary Education Committee,
Municipal Corporation, Kolhapur & Ors. ...Respondents.
                                WITH
                 (39) WRIT PETITION NO. 3042 OF 2026

The President,
Dhantara Social Foundation,
Jaysingpur, Dist. Kolhapur.            ...Petitioner.
        Versus
The Administrative Oicer,
Primary Education Committee,
Municipal Corporation, Kolhapur & Ors. ...Respondents.
                            ——————
Mr. Gajanan Savagave with Adv. Parswi Deodhar, for the Petitioners.
Mr. Sagar Mane, for the Respondent Nos.1 & 3.
Mr. Kedar Lad, for the Respondent No.2.
Mr. A. P. Vanarase, AGP, for the Respondent Nos.4 to 6-State.
                                ——————
                                  Coram :     Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
                                              Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
                                  Date      : September 04, 2026.
P. C. :

1.        The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner would submit

that subsequent to the iling of the petition, a representation is made

to the Respondent No.3, which is not decided. On instructions, he



Gaikwad RD                         1 of 2
                                                                        37-39-WP-2925-3042-2026.doc


                        submits that he is conining his relief only in respect of direction to

                        Respondent No.3 to decide the representation.

                        2.      Considering the relief, which is now being sought, the Petitions

                        are disposed of by directing the Respondent No.3 to decide the

                        representations expeditiously.



                         [Neeraj P. Dhote, J.]                     [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]

           Digitally
           signed by
           RAJU
RAJU       DATTATRAYA
DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD    Date:
           2026.09.07
           12:05:39
           +0530




                        Gaikwad RD                       2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…