Bombay High Court
MOHAMMAD RAFIQUE IBRAHIM TAMBEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn because the underlying proceedings have been concluded.
Summary
The petitioner, Mohammad Rafique Ibrahim Tambe, filed a writ petition challenging a decision made under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014. The Respondent State of Maharashtra submitted that the underlying proceedings had already been withdrawn and a final order dated 15‑07‑2026 had been passed, leaving no issue for the court to consider. The petitioner sought liberty to withdraw the writ petition and to file fresh proceedings if necessary. The Court noted that the petitioner had an alternative efficacious remedy and that the matter was already concluded. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn without addressing its merits.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition can be entertained when the underlying proceedings under the Street Vendors Act have been withdrawn and a final order passed
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a fresh remedy after withdrawal of the writ petition
Legislation cited
Subjects
- writ petition
- withdrawal
- Street Vendors Act
- maintainability
- jurisdiction
Judgment
16-wp-3577-26.doc
INGALE
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
Digitally signed
by PALLAVI
MAHENDRA
PALLAVI WARGAONKAR
MAHENDRA
WARGAONKAR Date:
2026.09.17
21:28:57
WRIT PETITION NO. 3577 OF 2026
+0530
Mohammad Rafique Ibrahim Tambe ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and ors. ...Respondents
...
Mr. Akshay R. Kapadia, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Suraj Gupte, AGP for the Respondent No.1-State.
...
CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ.
& ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C.:
1. The learned AGP for the Respondent No.1 on the
instructions submits that the proceedings have been
withdrawn under the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood
and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014. A notice has
been issued on the Respondents which has been responded
and later on, final order has been already passed on
15/07/2026. The same is not challenged in the instant
proceedings, even though the Petitioner has alternate
efficacious remedy to challenge the same before appropriate
forum. As such nothing survives in the matter, the Writ
1
16-wp-3577-26.doc
Petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed.
2. Confronted with the situation, learned counsel for the
Petitioner submits that liberty be granted to the Petitioner to
withdraw this Petition with leave to institute a fresh
proceedings in accordance with law.
3. With the aforesaid leave, the instant Writ Petition stands
Dismissed as withdrawn. We clarify that we have not adverted
on the merits of the matter.
[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]
2
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.