Bombay High Court

RAHUL SHYAM MANOHAR PANDEYversusRELIANCE ENTERPRISES AND 6 ORS.

Decided: 19 August 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court allowed the withdrawal of the writ petition and disposed of it without examining the merits, while keeping liberty to file a fresh petition.

Summary

Petitioner Rahul Shyam Manohar Pandey filed a writ petition against Reliance Enterprises and others seeking relief. The petitioner's counsel requested permission to withdraw the petition, with liberty to make representations to the authority if needed. The Court granted the withdrawal, clarified that it had not examined the merits of any contentions, and kept open the possibility of filing a fresh petition. No substantive issues were decided. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without prejudice.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition may be withdrawn at the request of the petitioner’s counsel
Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file a fresh petition thereafter

Subjects

writ petition
withdrawal
fresh petition
civil procedure
high court

Judgment

                                                      33K. WP 3094-2019.doc

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

                       WRIT PETITION NO.3094 OF 2019

Rahul Shyam Manohar Pandey                  ….   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.
Mr. Rakesh Pathak, 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
                                                           33K. WP 3094-2019.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
              by RAJESH
RAJESH        VASANT
VASANT        CHITTEWAN
CHITTEWAN     Date: 2026.08.21
              16:24:55 +0530

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

Shivani Samel