Bombay High Court

DOGU KORAGA POOJARIversusRELIANCE ENTERPRISES AND 3 ORS

Decided: 19 August 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The writ petition is disposed of upon the petitioner's request to withdraw, without examining the merits.

Summary

Petitioner Dogu Koraga Poojari filed a writ petition against Reliance Enterprises and others. The petitioner, through counsel, sought permission to withdraw the petition and requested liberty to make representations to the Authority if needed. The Court allowed the withdrawal, expressly stating that it had not examined the merits and that all contentions remain open. It also granted liberty to file a fresh petition in the future. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without any substantive adjudication.

Issues considered

Whether the writ petition may be withdrawn at the petitioner's request
Whether the petitioner's liberty to make fresh representations or file a new petition should be preserved

Subjects

writ petition
withdrawal
procedural order
civil procedure

Judgment

                                                      33H. WP 3074-2019.doc

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

                       WRIT PETITION NO.3074 OF 2019

Dogu Koraga Poojari                         ….   Petitioner
         Versus
Reliance Enterprises And 3 Ors.             …    Respondents
                                 …..
Mr. Jayesh Bhatt a/w Adv. Nazreen Manchekar for the Petitioners.
Adv. Shivani Samel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. Anoop Patil a/w Mr. Darpan Gupta and Ms. Kasturi Marathe for
Respondent Nos.6 and 7-SRA.
Smt. Nazia Sheikh, A.G.P. for Respondent-State.
                                 …..
                             CORAM: M.S. KARNIK &
                                      SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ.

                                 DATED : 19th AUGUST 2026
P.C.

1.            The learned Counsel for the Petitioners fairly submits on

instructions that he may be permitted to withdraw the Petition, with

liberty to the Petitioners to make representation to the Authority, if

necessary.


2.         It is made clear that we have not examined the contentions

raised in the Writ Petition on merits and all the contentions of the

parties are kept open.



RaJesh Chittewan, PS                                                     1/2
                                                           33H. WP 3074-2019.doc

3.        Liberty to file a fresh Petition is also kept open.


4.        The Writ Petition stands disposed of.




(SANDESH D. PATIL, J.)                              (M.S. KARNIK, J.)




RaJesh Chittewan, PS                                                          2/2
             Digitally signed
RAJESH    by RAJESH
          VASANT
VASANT    CHITTEWAN
CHITTEWAN Date: 2026.08.21
             16:11:52 +0530

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.