Bombay High Court
FAKIRA BABURAO DEVHADRAO AND OTHERSversusTHE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER NASHIK AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The writ petition is dismissed because an alternate and equally efficacious remedy exists.
Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 30 September 2016 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nashik. The court observed that the petitioners have an alternate and equally efficacious remedy by filing a second revision before the State Government, a principle previously affirmed by the Supreme Court in Gurudassing Nawoosing Panjwani v. State of Maharashtra. Because of the availability of this alternative remedy, the High Court declined to entertain the writ petition and disposed of it. The court directed the petitioners to file the second revision within six months and noted that any delay in filing would be considered by the State Government when deciding a condonation application. The interim relief granted earlier was ordered to remain in force until the State Government decides the revision.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ petition is maintainable when an alternate and equally efficacious remedy (revision before the State Government) is available.
Subjects
- writ petition
- revision
- alternate remedy
- State Government
- condonation of delay
- interim relief
- jurisdiction
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:19926
Dilwale 1 9-wp-765-17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
9 WRIT PETITION NO. 765 OF 2017
Fakira Baburao Devhadrao And Others
VERSUS
The Additional Commissioner Nashik And Others
...
Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Sonavane Narendra D.
AGP for Respondents: Mr. R. B. Dhaware
Advocate for Respondent No.5 : Mr. Padalkar Harshad H
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 28.04.2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties.
2. The petitioners are challenging the order dated 30.09.2016 passed
by the Additional Commissioner, Nashik in RTS Revision No.47/2016.
3. The petitioners are having an alternate and equally efficacious
remedy against the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nashik,
to file a revision before the State Government and this issue is already
considered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter “Gurudassing
Nawoosing Panjwani v. State of Maharashtra and Others” reported in
2015 AIR SCW 6277 decided on 06.11.2015.
4. In view of availability of alternate remedy, I am not inclined to
entertain the present petition and the same is disposed of accordingly.
5. The petitioner is at liberty to file Second Revision before the State
Government within a period of six month from today.
Dilwale 2 9-wp-765-17.odt
6. If the petitioner files the Revision within a period of six weeks from
today, the delay caused in prosecuting the present petition shall be
considered by the State Government while deciding an application for
condonation of delay.
7. The State Government is directed to decide the Revision within a
period of six months thereafter.
8. The interim relief granted by this Court on 30.01.2017 shall
continue till the State Government decides the Second Revision.
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
Checking your session…