Lalit Galande vs Ld Assistant Charity Commissioner 2 AND ANR — HCBM10154572026

Case under Maharashtra Public Trusts Act Section 227. Status: For Orders (Objection Not Removed). Next hearing: 24th June 2026.

For Orders (Objection Not Removed) Next hearing 24-Jun-2026 this date has passed

CNR: HCBM010154572026

e-Filing Number

27-03-2026

Filing Number

WP/8939/2026

Filing Date

27-Mar-2026

Judge

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

Coram

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

Bench Type

Single

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )

Sub-Category

Orders passed by Quasi Judicial Authority Other than Labour and Industrial Court ( 105 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Maharashtra Public Trusts Act Section 227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Lalit Galande

    Adv. Neha Wadekar

  2. 2.Sachin Sopan Mednekar

    Adv. Neha Wadekar

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ld Assistant Charity Commissioner 2 AND ANR

  2. 2.RLM Foundation

Case History

  1. 24-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 24-Jun-2026

    For Orders (Objection Not Removed)

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

  3. 09-Jun-2026

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

    Case Summary: Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 8939 of 2026 by petitioners Lalit Galande and Sachin Sopan Mednekar against the Charity Commissioner and RLM Foundation was adjourned. The petitioners failed to remove office objections after being notified on 27th April 2026. The Registrar granted them two weeks additional time to cure the defects; failure to do so will result in refusal of registration under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII of Bombay High Court Rules, 1960. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 27-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 27-Mar-2026

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 8939 of 2026 by petitioners Lalit Galande and Sachin Sopan Mednekar against the Charity Commissioner and RLM Foundation was adjourned. The petitioners failed to remove office objections after being notified on 27th April 2026. The Registrar granted them two weeks additional time to cure the defects; failure to do so will result in refusal of registration under Rule 3(iii) of Chapter XVII of Bombay High Court 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