Bombay High Court

DR. SHITAL UTTAM SHENDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT MUMBAI AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The writ petitions are disposed of, with the challenge to the resolution to be decided by the pending Special Leave Petition, and the interim protection is continued.

Summary

Several doctors filed writ petitions challenging clauses 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 and 4.7 of a Government resolution dated 07‑08‑2012. The High Court had already decided the substantive issue in a common judgment dated 30‑07‑2026 in Writ Petition No. 1583 of 2025 and related petitions. A Special Leave Petition (C No. 28560 of 2022) is pending before the Supreme Court, where interim protection was granted by this Court. The Bench held that the pending petitions should be disposed of, leaving the challenge to be finally decided by the Supreme Court SLP. The interim protection granted earlier is to continue, and will automatically lapse if the SLP is vacated or dismissed. Consequently, the petitions are disposed of with the direction that the final outcome depends on the Supreme Court decision.

Issues considered

Whether clauses 4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 and 4.7 of the Government resolution dated 07‑08‑2012 are valid.
Whether the interim relief granted in the writ petitions should continue pending the decision of the Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court.

Subjects

writ petition
interim protection
special leave petition
government resolution
disposal
preliminary injunction

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:42223-DB

                                                1                     WP / 7392 / 2023


                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                  WRIT PETITION NO. 7392 OF 2023

                                    DR. SHITAL UTTAM SHENDE
                                             VERSUS
                                   THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                              AND
                                  WRIT PETITION NO. 559 OF 2024

                             DR. GOVIND M. KULKARNI AND ANOTHER
                                            VERSUS
                             THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS

                                              AND
                                  WRIT PETITION NO. 598 OF 2024

                    DR. VIDYA CHANDRAKANT JADHAV (GOSAVI) AND OTHERS
                                         VERSUS
                                THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                              AND
                                  WRIT PETITION NO. 8113 OF 2023

                                 DR. SATISH SHIMPI AND OTHERS
                                            VERSUS
                               THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

                                                    ...
                          Advocate for petitioner : Mr. C.V. Dharurkar in all WP
                           Addl.GP for the respondent – State : Mr. P.S. Patil
                                                    ...

                           CORAM               : KISHORE C. SANT AND
                                                 JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.

                           DATE                : 10 SEPTEMBER 2026

              PER COURT :

                           Not on Board. Taken on Board.


              2.           Heard learned advocate for the petitioner and learned AGP

              Mr. Patil for the respondent – State.
                                 2                   WP / 7392 / 2023



3.          These petitions arise out of challenge to clauses 4.1, 4.3,

4.4, 4.5 and 4.7 of the Government resolution dated 07.08.2012. This

Court has already passed a common judgment and order on

30.07.2026 in writ petition no. 1583 of 2025 and connected writ

petitions. The issue is already decided. Now Special Leave Petition

bearing (C) No. 28560 of 2022 is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme

Court wherein notices are issued and interim protection granted by this

Court is continued.


4.          Considering the above, these petitions can be conveniently

disposed of with a direction that the challenge raised shall be subject to

the final outcome of the Special Leave Petition pending before the

Hon’ble Supreme Court.


5.          In view of above, the petitions stand disposed of.


6.          The interim protection shall be continued even in the

present petitions. In the event of vacating of the interim relief in the

Special Leave Petition or dismissal of the Special Leave Petition, the

interim relief shall stand vacated automatically.




       [ JITENDRA JAIN ]                    [ KISHORE C. SANT ]
            JUDGE                                 JUDGE

arp/

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…