Bombay High Court
SHAMBHU DHONDIRAM PAWARversusTHE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The court ordered that the pending application before the Inspector General of Registration be decided within three months and disposed the writ petition without issuing notice or addressing the merits.
Summary
Shambhu Dhondiram Pawar filed a writ petition challenging an action/communication dated 24 July 2023, claiming he only became aware of it in December 2025. The petitioner sought expeditious consideration of an application he filed on 19 January 2026 before the Inspector General of Registration, which remains pending. The court examined the petitioner's plea of delay and the request for notice to the respondents, but noted that the pending application itself should be decided. It declined to issue notice, directing that the application be heard and decided within three months, affording all stakeholders a hearing. The writ petition was consequently disposed without any adjudication on the merits, leaving all contentions open.
Issues considered
- Whether the court should issue notice to the respondents in the writ petition.
- Whether the writ petition can be disposed without addressing the merits due to a pending application.
- Whether the pending application before the Inspector General of Registration must be decided expeditiously.
Subjects
- writ petition
- procedural delay
- notice
- expeditious disposal
- registration
- court jurisdiction
Judgment
23-WP.5596.2026.doc
Salunke
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Digitally
signed by
JAYANT
JAYANT VISHWANATH
VISHWANATH SALUNKE
SALUNKE Date:
WRIT PETITION NO. 5596 OF 2026
2026.09.11
18:47:56
+0530
Shambhu Dhondiram Pawar } Petitioner
Versus
The Inspector General of Registration & Ors.} Respondents
Mr. Vivek Salunke, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Ms. Neha S. Bhide, Government Pleader with Mr. O. A.
Chandurkar, Additional Government Pleader and
Ms.Pooja Patil, AGP for Respondents-State.
CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
DATE : 10th SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Vivek Salunke, the learned counsel for the
Petitioner and Mr. Chandurkar, the learned Additional Government
Pleader on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 (State).
2. Qua the plea on delay and latches, the learned counsel for the
Petitioner invited our attention to Paragraph No. 5 of the Petition
and submitted that the Petitioner had no knowledge of the
impugned action/communication dated 24 th July 2023. First time
he realized about the initiation of the impugned action in December
2025.
3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner confines the reliefs
sought in the instant Petition to an Application dated 19 th January
2026, which is stated to be filed by the Petitioner and pending
before Respondent No.1-Inspector General of Registration. He
1
23-WP.5596.2026.doc
submits that the said Application may be directed to be
considered/decided expeditiously.
4. Considering the factual situation, we are not inclined to issue
notice to the Respondents since the application filed by the
Petitioner before the Respondent No.1-Inspector General of
Registration is stated to be pending. We expect the same shall be
considered and decided in accordance with law, expeditiously,
preferably within a period of three months from today, after
affording an opportunity of hearing to all the stake holders.
5. With the aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
6. We make it clear that we have not adverted to the merits of
the matter and all contentions of the parties are kept open.
[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]
2
Checking your session…