Bombay High Court
ASHOKA STHAPATYA LTD THRU AUTHORIZEDversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRU SECRETARY AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court disposed of the petition, holding that mandamus is not the proper remedy for recovery of dues and that the petition cannot proceed without undisputed amounts.
Summary
Ashoka Sthapatya Ltd. filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the State of Maharashtra to pay outstanding amounts owed for its work. The High Court noted that mandamus is not the appropriate remedy for a recovery suit and would only consider the petition if undisputed amounts were shown. The respondents produced a communication indicating that most of the dues had been paid, with Rs.12,15,40,524 pending pending an inquiry into the quality of the work. The Court directed that the inquiry, which began in 2025, be completed within 120 days and held that any grievance after the inquiry must be pursued through ordinary recovery proceedings. Accordingly, the petition was disposed of without granting the writ.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus is an appropriate remedy for recovery of unpaid amounts from the State.
- Whether the High Court can entertain the petition in the absence of undisputed payable amounts.
Subjects
- writ of mandamus
- recovery of dues
- public authority
- pending inquiry
- administrative law
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
GAURI AMIT
GAURI GAEKWAD
AMIT Date: 907.WP-6394-2026.odt
GAEKWAD 2026.09.05
10:38:13
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.6394 OF 2026
Ashoka Sthapatya Limited ….Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ….Respondents
----
Mr. A.M. Kulkarni a/w. Mr. Sachin Pawar and Mr. Shailesh Chavan
for the Petitioner.
Mrs. Neha S. Bhide, GP a/w. Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. GP and
Mrs. G.R. Raghuwanshi, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
----
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ACJ.
&
GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE : 3rd SEPTEMBER, 2026
P.C. :-
1. Yesterday, when this matter was heard, we made it clear
to the learned Advocate for the Petitioner that we would not
entertain the Petitioner’s Petition, as it is in the nature of seeking a
Writ of Mandamus for recovery of unpaid amounts from the State
Government. It is settled law that the High Court should not indulge
in issuing Writs, as if it is dealing with a recovery Suit. We,
therefore, made it clear to the learned Advocate for the Petitioner
that we would consider this Petition only if we notice undisputed
amounts, due and payable.
Gauri Gaekwad 1 of 3
907.WP-6394-2026.odt
2. The learned Addl. GP has tendered a copy of the
communication received by him dated 2nd September, 2026 from the
Deputy Director, Health Services (Transport), Pune, wherein it is
stated that the Petitioner has been paid a substantial portion of the
outstanding bills. An amount of Rs.12,15,40,524/- has been kept
pending since an inquiry has been instituted in the light of certain
complaints regarding the work performed by the Petitioner. After the
inquiry is concluded, and if the Petitioner’s work is not under any
objection, the Department may sanction the grants for making
payment to the Petitioner. He adds that if there is an adverse finding
regarding the quality of the work performed by the Petitioner, the
Department may consider the same and take an independent
decision.
3. Needless to state, if the Petitioner has any grievance
about the conclusions drawn after the inquiry, which have led to the
withholding of some of the amounts payable pursuant to the bills
raised, the Petitioner would be at liberty to initiate appropriate
recovery proceedings in the light of the same.
Gauri Gaekwad 2 of 3
907.WP-6394-2026.odt
4. We expect the pending inquiry, which has commenced
in 2025, to be concluded within a period of 120 days from today.
5. In view of the above, by recording the above statement,
this Petition is disposed off.
(GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)
Gauri Gaekwad 3 of 3
Checking your session…