Disposed

Bhagyashri Dilip Golande v. the State of Maharashtra Thru. Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC4 Mar 2026WP/922/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court writ petitions 2026; WP 922/2026 (Bhagyashri Dilip Golande) and WP 925/2026 (Sheetal Madhukar Dhaybar) vs State of Maharashtra; approval proposals dated 28-12-2023 pending with Respondent No.2; Pavitra Portal; Ratna Ramesh Salunke v State of Maharashtra (judgment dated 16-10-2025, WP 6949/2025 and connected matters) followed; direction to decide per law within 90 days; liberty fo

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondent No.2 to consider the pending approval proposals (dated 28-12-2023) strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down in law, following the Ratna Ramesh Salunke directions whe

Bhagyashri Dilip Golande Vs the State of Maharashtra Thru. Secretary and Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

54&55.WP-922-2026.odt

¶2

Digitally signed by GAURI AMIT GAURI GAEKWAD AMIT Date: GAEKWAD 2026.03.06 11:13:45 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

(54) WRIT PETITION NO.922 OF 2026

¶5

Bhagyashri Dilip Golande ….Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ….Respondents AND (55) WRIT PETITION NO.925 OF 2026

¶8

Sheetal Madhukar Dhaybar ….Petitioner

¶9

Versus

¶10

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ….Respondents

¶11

Mr. Amol Ghurde i/b. Mr. Pramod Kathane for the Petitioner in both Petitions.

¶12

Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. GP a/w. Mr. M.M. Pabale, AGP for the Respondent – State in WP/922/2026.

¶13

Mrs. P.M. Joshi-Deshpande, AGP for the Respondent – State in WP/925/2026.

¶14

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &

¶15

ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

¶16

DATE : 4^th MARCH, 2026

¶17

P.C. :-

¶18

In both these Petitions, the proposals dated

¶19

28^th December, 2023 seeking approval are said to be pending with Respondent No.2.

¶20

The learned Addl. GP and AGP submit that the said

¶21

Authority will have to consider the directions issued and the law

¶22

1 of 2

¶23

Gauri Gaekwad

¶24

54&55.WP-922-2026.odt

¶25

laid down in Ratna Ramesh Salunke and Ors. v/s. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.¹ It is submitted that the procedure laid down in Ratna Ramesh Salunke (supra) would be followed and the authorities would require at least 90 days’ time to decide the proposals.

¶26

In view of the above, both these Petitions are disposed off with a direction to Respondent No.2 to consider the pending proposals strictly in accordance with the procedure laid down in law. If the issue of Pavitra Portal is involved in any of these matters, the directions set out in Ratna Ramesh Salunke (supra) shall be followed and the Management would be called upon to participate in the hearing by filing affidavits pertaining to each of these cases. All grounds are kept open to be considered.

¶27

We would expect Respondent No.2 to arrive at a reasoned decision in both these cases, within a period of 90 days from today. If the Authority finds itself short of time, liberty is granted to move an Interim Application seeking extension of time.

¶28

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

¶29

1 Judgment dated 16^th October, 2025 in Writ Petition No.6949 of 2025 and connected matters.

¶30

2 of 2

¶31

Gauri Gaekwad

Bhagyashri Dilip Golande v. the State of Maharashtra Thru. Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhagyashri Dilip Golande v. the State of Maharashtra Thru. Secretary 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases