Bombay High Court
ASHRAYA KRUSHI SEVA PRATISTHAN THROUGH ITS CHAIRMANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTHRA THR. SECRETARY FOR MAHARASHTRA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The High Court held that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 does not extend to disputes over termination of contracts involving financial consequences.
Summary
The petitioner, Ashraya Krushi Seva Pratisthan, filed a writ petition under Article 226 challenging the termination of a contract with the State of Maharashtra, alleging financial loss. The Court examined whether its writ jurisdiction extends to disputes involving termination of contracts with monetary implications. It held that such matters are not within the scope of Article 226 and should be pursued in a civil court where damages can be quantified. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with the Court noting that the dismissal does not bar the petitioner from approaching a civil court for relief. The decision emphasizes the appropriate forum for contractual disputes involving public authorities.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can exercise writ jurisdiction under Article 226 in matters concerning termination of contracts with financial implications.
Subjects
- Article 226
- Writ jurisdiction
- Contract termination
- Civil court remedy
- Damages quantification
- Public authority
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.7905 OF 2026
Ashraya Krushi Seva Pratisthan, Mumbai .. Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra,
Through Maharashtra State Road Transport
Corporation and Ors. .. Respondents
Mr. Narayan Bubna, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. O.A. Chandurkar, Additional Government Pleader with Mrs. Apurva
Thipsay, ‘B’ Panel Counsel, for the Respondent-State of Maharashtra.
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ACJ. &
GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE : 19th August, 2026.
P.C. :
1. We have heard the learned advocate for the Petitioner for
some time. We are not inclined to exercise our Writ jurisdiction under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India in matters of termination of
contracts involving financial implications. The Petitioner can assail the
termination before the Civil Court, get the damages quantified and
recover the same.
2. In view of the above, this Petition is dismissed.
3. Needles to state, if the Petitioner approaches the Civil Court
1/2
926-WP-7905-2026.odt Dixit
for quantification of damages and reliefs connected therewith, the
dismissal of this Petition would not be an impediment and all
contentions of all the stakeholders are kept open.
[ GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J. ] [ ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ]
Digitally
signed by
SNEHA SNEHA 2/2
ABHAY
ABHAY DIXIT
Date: 926-WP-7905-2026.odt Dixit
DIXIT 2026.08.20
14:16:22
+0530
Checking your session…