AMOL SUBHASH BHADANE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS — WP/68/2026
Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 01st April 2026.
CNR: HCBM030383432025
Filing Number
WP/28370/2025
Filing Date
19-09-2025
Registration No
WP/68/2026
Registration Date
03-01-2026
Judge
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE VIBHA KANKANWADI , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR
Coram
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE VIBHA KANKANWADI , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR
Bench Type
Division
Judicial Branch
Civil
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
AMOL SUBHASH BHADANE
Adv. Chaudhari N. L.
Respondent(s)
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
THE ADDL DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER NASHIK DIVISION
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE VIBHA KANKANWADI , HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR
PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS
PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS
PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-01-2026 | PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS |
| 01-04-2026 | PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS |
| 06-02-2026 | PETITIONS FOR ADMISSION - FRESH CIVIL SIDE MATTERS |
Orders
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of Amol Subhash Bhadane's writ petition challenging his compulsory retirement as a Gram Sevak, finding that a statutory revision petition (Appeal No. 166 of 2025) was already pending before the appropriate authority. Rather than adjudicating the merits, the Court directed the State to decide the pending revision within three months, holding it inappropriate to intervene while the statutory remedy remained available. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) disposed of Amol Subhash Bhadane's writ petition challenging his compulsory retirement as a Gram Sevak, finding that a statutory revision petition (Appeal No. 166 of 2025) was already pending before the appropriate authority. Rather than adjudicating the merits, the Court directed the State to decide the pending revision within three months, holding it inappropriate to intervene while the statutory remedy remained available. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts