Bombay High Court

RAJKUMAR SHRINATH CHAURSIYAversusGRIEVANCE REDRESSAL COMMITTEE

Decided: 28 September 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED

Holding

The petition is dismissed as there is no justifiable reason to entertain a belated challenge to the certification.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajkumar Shrinath Chaursiya, filed a writ petition challenging the certification of the name of respondent No.5, Dineshkumar Shrinath Chaursiya, in Annexure‑II. The challenge was raised after a lapse of sixteen years from the date of certification. The Court observed that the petition lacked substance and that the delay was unreasonable, noting that both the concerned authorities had already declined to entertain the belated claim. Exercising its supervisory jurisdiction, the Court found no justifiable reason to permit the petition. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the petitioner directed to seek any other available legal remedies.

Issues considered

Whether a petition challenging a certification after a delay of sixteen years can be entertained by the High Court.

Subjects

supervisory jurisdiction
belated petition
certification challenge
civil procedure
high court dismissal

Judgment

                                                                       17-WP4408-2026.DOC

                                                                                   Santosh

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

                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 4408 OF 2026

                      Rajkumar Shrinath Chaursiya                            ...Petitioner
                                       Versus
                      Grievance Redressal Committee And Ors.             …Respondents

                      Mr. Vinod Panday, through VC, for the Petitioner.
                      Ms. Rita Joshi, AGP for the State.
                      Mr. Abhijit Aher, i/b Tanaya Goswami, for Respondent No.3.
SANTOSH
SUBHASH
KULKARNI                                            CORAM:     N. J. JAMADAR, J.
Digitally signed by                                 DATED:     28th SEPTEMBER, 2026
SANTOSH SUBHASH
KULKARNI
Date: 2026.09.29
14:57:06 +0530
                      PC:-

                      1.     Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

                      2.     There is no substance in the petition as the challenge to

                      the certification of the name of respondent No.5 Dineshkumar

                      Shrinath Chaursiya in Annexure-II was raised by the petitioner

                      after a period of 16 years. Both the authorities have justifiably

                      declined to entertain such belated petition.

                      3.     This Court, in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction, does

                      not find any justifiable reason to entertain the petition.

                      4.     The petition stands dismissed.

                      5.     The petitioner is at liberty to avail the remedies as

                      available in law.

                                                                 [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]
                                                      1/1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.