Dismissed

Anil Bhaskar Pakhare v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Home Dept. and Ors.

Bombay HC14 Jul 2022WP/8414/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay issued orders in five connected writ petitions challenging police orders based on decisions by the Administrative Tribunal. Since petitioners were not before the Tribunal, the Court held writ remedies were not maintainable. Petitions were dismissed with liberty to approach the Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioners to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in accordance with law.

Anil Bhaskar Pakhare Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

904-aswp8411-2022 & connected

¶2

AGK

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 8411 OF 2022

¶5

Anant Ashroba Jogdand …Petitioner

¶6

V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Home Department & Ors. …Respondents

¶8

WITH

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO. 8414 OF 2022

¶10

Anil Bhaskar Pakhare …Petitioner

¶11

V/s.

¶12

The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Home Department & Ors. …Respondents

¶13

WITH

¶14

WRIT PETITION NO. 8415 OF 2022

¶15

Sagar Vitthal Londhe …Petitioner

¶16

V/s.

¶17

The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Home Department & Ors. …Respondents

¶18

WITH

¶19

WRIT PETITION NO. 8412 OF 2022

¶20

Nitin Ashok Nangare & Ors. …Petitioners

¶21

V/s.

¶22

The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Home

¶23

¶24

904-aswp8411-2022 & connected

¶25

Department & Ors. …Respondents

¶26

WITH

¶27

WRIT PETITION NO. 8413 OF 2022

¶28

Ramdas Shravan Padle …Petitioner V/s.

¶29

The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Home Department & Ors. …Respondents

¶30

Mr. P. B. Gujar for the petitioner in WP/8411/2022, WP/8414/2022 & WP/8415/2022.

¶31

Ms. Darshna Naval with Mr. Pranav Avhad i/by Mr. Suraju Sawardekar for the petitioner in WP/8412/ 2022 & WP/8413/2022.

¶32

Mr. P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader with Mr. M. M. pabale, AGP for State in WP/8411/2022, WP/8415/2022, WP/8412/2022 & WP/8413/2022.

¶33

Mr. P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader with Mr. A. J. Patel, AGP and Mr. M. M. Pabale, AGP for State in WP/8414/2022.

¶34

CORAM: DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ & M. S. KARNIK, J.

¶35

DATE: JULY 14, 2022

¶36

P.C.:

¶37

Writ Petition No. 8411 of 2022:

¶38

1. An order dated 6^th May 2022 issued by the respondent No.2, Additional Director General of Police, Maharashtra State, Mumbai is under challenge in this petition. Such order was passed by the respondent no.2 in terms of an order passed by

¶39

¶40

904-aswp8411-2022 & connected

¶41

the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (hereafter “the Tribunal”, for short).

¶42

2. The petitioner was not a party to the proceedings before the Tribunal. The impugned order of the respondent no.2, having been passed in terms of an order passed by the Tribunal, the writ jurisdiction of this Court cannot be invoked directly. Any challenge to the impugned order, or to the order of the Tribunal, must be laid first before the Tribunal. This writ petition, at this stage, before this Court is not maintainable.

¶43

3. The writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Tribunal in accordance with law. No costs.

¶44

4. All contentions are left open.

¶45

Writ Petition Nos. 8414, 8415, 8412 & 8413 of 2022:

¶46

1. In all these writ petitions, the order under challenge is common, i.e., the order dated 11^th April 2022 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai (hereafter “the Tribunal”, for short) while disposing of a batch of original applications.

¶47

2. None of the petitioners were parties to the proceedings before the Tribunal. Since the petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 11^th April 2022, their remedy lies in approaching the Tribunal by presenting an appropriate application, either original or review.

¶48

3. The view that we are taking finds support from the decisions of the Supreme Court reported in (1997) 6 SCC 473 ( K. Ajit Babu & Ors vs. Union of India & Ors. ) and (2007)

¶49

¶50

904-aswp8411-2022 & connected

¶51

14 SCC 54 ( Rama Rao vs. M. G. Maheshwara Rao & Ors .)

¶52

4. These writ petitions are not entertained and stand dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Tribunal in accordance with law. No costs.

¶53

5. All contentions are left open.

¶54

(M. S. KARNIK, J.)

¶55

(CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶56

Digitally signed by ATUL ATUL GANESH GANESH KULKARNI KULKARNI Date: 2022.07.14 18:19:12 +0530

¶57

Anil Bhaskar Pakhare v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Home Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Bhaskar Pakhare v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Home Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Thru Secretary, Higher and Technical Edu. Dept. and Anr. Vs Shri. Yeshwant Maruti Patil and Ors.

Rajvilas Raosaheb More Vs the State of Maharashtra Thru Dy. Secretary, Home Dept. and Ors.

Ganesh Pawar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sagar Lookouts vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority and 2 Others

Lt. Col. Anil Kumar Yadav Vs Military Secretary Branch and 2 Ors.

Janhit Manch and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.