In this PIL concerning revocation of administrative action under the Maharashtra Prohibition Act, the Court found the notification to be draft rules inviting public objections.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
pil25.22.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
908 PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 25 OF 2022
Sonali Suhas Deulkar ….Petitioner VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others …..Respondents
Mr. V. S. Undre, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for the State.
CORAM : SMT VIBHA KANKANWADI & AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ. DATE : 30th APRIL, 2026.
PER COURT :
pil25.22.odt
Section 153 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act. The learned AGP, upon instructions, makes a specific statement that these rules have not been implemented and if at all, the Government wants to implement the same, it has to seek the necessary permission from the concerned Ministry or even may require to go before the floor.
( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR ) ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ) JUDGE JUDGE dyb
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the notification dated 31.03.2022 attracting Section 153 of the Maharashtra Prohibition Act being only draft rules requires quashing.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sonali Suhas Deulkar
The State of Maharashtra
Vibha Kankanwadi
Ajit B. Kadethankar
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
