JAIDEEPRAJ INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED THR ITS DIRECTOR RAJABHAU A GHULE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND ORS — WP/5042/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 226, 227. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM030169082026

Filing Number

WP/12563/2026

Filing Date

27-Apr-2026

Registration No

WP/5042/2026

Registration Date

04-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar

Coram

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar

Bench Type

Division

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226, 227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JAIDEEPRAJ INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED THR ITS DIRECTOR RAJABHAU A GHULE

    Adv. SALUNKE LEGAL LLP ADVOCATES AND CONSULTANTS

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND ORS

    Adv. Bora Satyajit S. FOR R.NO. 3 1123

  2. 2.MAHARASHTRA STATE JEEVAN P RADHIKARNA THROUGH THE MEMBER SECRETARY

  3. 3.PARBHANI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THROUGH TIS COMMISSIONER

  4. 4.THE CITY ENGINEER

  5. 5.THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER WTER SUPPLY TENDAR INVITING AUTHORITY

  6. 6.EGAL INFRA INDIA LTD.

  7. 7.LAXMI CONSTRUCTIONS PACHORA

  8. 8.VIJYOTI CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD. THROUGH ITS DIRECTRE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

    Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi,hon'ble Shri Justice Ajit B. KadethankarView PDF

    Case Summary: Jaideepraj Infrastructure Private Limited v. State of Maharashtra Court Decision: The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of the writ petition by granting the petitioner an opportunity to present its case before Parbhani Municipal Corporation. The court directed the petitioner to appear on 06.05.2026 with relevant documents and the municipal corporation to decide on the petitioner's application by 08.05.2026, finding that natural justice principles required the petitioner be heard before disqualification. Key Reasoning: The court held that although the petitioner's technical bid was rejected based on alleged blacklisting by Vasai-Virar Municipal Corporation, the petitioner was never formally blacklisted—the municipal corporation only threatened to blacklist if poor performance continued. Additionally, the petitioner's registration was renewed in 2023, and the Supreme Court had directed reconsideration of the blacklisting decision. The court found the rejection violated natural justice as no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner to explain the circumstances before rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    Petitions For Admission - Fresh CIVIL Side Matters

    Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar

  4. 27-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/5042/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Jaideepraj Infrastructure Private Limited v. State of Maharashtra Court Decision: The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of the writ petition by granting the petitioner an opportunity to present its case before Parbhani Municipal Corporation. The court directed the petitioner to appear on 06.05.2026 with relevant documents and the municipal corporation to decide on the petitioner's application by 08.05.2026, finding that natural justice principles required the petitioner be heard before disqualification. Key Reasoning: The court held that although the petitioner's technical bid was rejected based on alleged blacklisting by Vasai-Virar Municipal Corporation, the petitioner was never formally blacklisted—the municipal corporation only threatened to blacklist if poor performance continued. Additionally, the petitioner's registration was renewed in 2023, and the Supreme Court had directed reconsideration of the blacklisting decision. The court found the rejection violated natural justice as no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner to explain the circumstances before rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case