SAMEER SHRIKANT RANJIT AND ANR vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. GOVT PLEADER AND ANR — HCBM10131452026

Case under Bombay Public Trust Act. Status: For Orders (Objection Not Removed). Next hearing: 16th June 2026.

For Orders (Objection Not Removed) Next hearing 16-Jun-2026 this date has passed

CNR: HCBM010131452026

Filing Number

WP/7609/2026

Filing Date

16-Mar-2026

Judge

Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)

Coram

Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)

Bench Type

Single

Category

RELIGIOUS/CHARITABLE ENDOWMWNTS AND PUBLIC TRUST ( 33 )

Sub-Category

GRANT/NON GRANT FOR SANCTION/AUTHORISATION FOR ALLIENATION OF IMOVABLE TRUST PROPERTY ( 1 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Bombay Public Trust Act

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SAMEER SHRIKANT RANJIT AND ANR

    Adv. joylegal

  2. 2.GAUTAM ASHOK WELKAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. GOVT PLEADER AND ANR

  2. 2.THE JOINT CHARITY COMMISSIONER-II MAHARASHTRA STATE MUMBAI

  3. 3.YATIN DHARGALKAR

Case History

  1. 16-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    For Orders (Objection Not Removed)

    Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)

  3. 05-May-2026

    Shri. P. P. Jadhav, Registrar(Judl I)View PDF

    Case Summary: Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 7609 of 2026 before Bombay High Court was adjourned. The petitioners and their advocate failed to remove office objections after being notified on 17th April 2026. Instead of refusing registration outright, the Registrar granted a final two-week extension (excluding summer vacation) to cure the defects. If objections remain unresolved, registration will be refused under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 17-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 16-Mar-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 7609 of 2026 before Bombay High Court was adjourned. The petitioners and their advocate failed to remove office objections after being notified on 17th April 2026. Instead of refusing registration outright, the Registrar granted a final two-week extension (excluding summer vacation) to cure the defects. If objections remain unresolved, registration will be refused under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case