Bombay High Court
VIJAY RAMCHANDRA MANE AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. SECRETARY, RURAL AND WATER CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT AND ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court disposed of the petition, directing Respondents No.4 and No.5 to decide the pending representations within 45 days by applying the applicable law and issuing a reasoned order.
Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing Respondents No.4 and No.5 to decide pending representations filed by the petitioners. The petitioners argued that the authorities had failed to act on their representations and requested the court to intervene. The respondents contended that the representations would be dealt with in accordance with the law laid down by the court. The bench examined whether the High Court could issue a mandamus directing administrative authorities to decide pending representations. It held that the petition could be disposed of by directing the respondents to apply the applicable law and decide the representations within a specified time. Consequently, the court disposed of the petition, ordering Respondents No.4 and No.5 to issue reasoned orders within 45 days and informing the petitioners of the decision.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can issue a writ of mandamus directing administrative authorities to decide pending representations under Article 226.
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- Article 226
- representation
- administrative law
- High Court
- direction
Judgment
911.WP-3054-2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3054 OF 2026
Vijay Ramchandra Mane & Ors. ….Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ….Respondents
----
Mr. Datta Pawar a/w. Mr. Eshan Nayak and Ms. Sakshi Jankar for the
Petitioners.
Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for the Respondent, the State.
Mr. R.P. Kadam for Respondent Nos.4 and 5.
----
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ACJ.
&
NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.
DATE : 10th JULY, 2026
P.C. :-
1. The learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that the
representations set out in prayer clause (b) may be considered by
Respondent No.4 and 5. Prayer clause (b) reads as under :
(b) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ
of mandamus or a writ, direction or order in the
nature of the mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
direction or order under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India and thereby be pleased to direct
the Respondents no.4 to decide representations filed
by the Petitioners no.1 & 2 and the Respondent no.5
to decide representations of Petitioners no.3 & 4.
2. The learned Advocate representing Respondent Nos.4 and 5
submits that the representations would be dealt with by the said
Authorities in the light of the law laid down by this Court.
Gauri Gaekwad 1 of 2
911.WP-3054-2026.odt
3. Considering the above, this Petition is disposed off with a
direction to Respondent Nos.4 and 5 to apply the law as is applicable to
the pending representations of the Petitioners and decide the same by a
reasoned order, within 45 days from today. The decision shall be
communicated to the Petitioners. If the Petitioners are aggrieved, liberty
to avail of a remedy as is permissible in law.
(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
Gauri Gaekwad 2 of 2
Checking your session…