VANDANA AVINASH JOGI AND OTHERS vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER — HCBM30457242025

Case under Constitution of India Section 226. Next hearing: 20th November 2025.

Next hearing 20-Nov-2025

CNR: HCBM030457242025

Filing Number

WP/33820/2025

Filing Date

13-Nov-2025

Judge

Shri Rajesh A. Sasne (Registrar Judl.)

Coram

Shri Rajesh A. Sasne (Registrar Judl.)

Bench Type

Division

Judicial Branch

Civil

Last updated 17-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 226
Mah.zp & Panchayat Samities Act 1961

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VANDANA AVINASH JOGI AND OTHERS

    Adv. SONTAKKE SANDEEP B

  2. 2.RAVINDRA MADHAV THAKUR

  3. 3.RAVINDRA TILAKCHAND SONWANE

  4. 4.JITENDRA SURYAKANT JAWALE

  5. 5.RAJENDRA TULSHIRAM DHANGAR

  6. 6.RAJARAM TUKARAM KALE

  7. 7.KISHOR NAMDEV WAYKOLE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

  2. 2.THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Case History

  1. 20-Nov-2025

    Next hearingPending

  2. 29-Jun-2026

    Objections Not Removed (Third Time)

    Shri Rajesh A. Sasne (Registrar Judl.)

  3. 15-Jun-2026

    Shri Rajesh A. Sasne (Registrar Judl.)View PDF

    Summary: The High Court at Aurangabad, in 37 consolidated writ petitions (WPST Nos. 24955/2025 to 1502/2026), granted petitioners a final two-week extension to remove office objections. The court warned that failure to comply will result in automatic refusal of registration without further notice, as petitioners failed to appear despite two prior opportunities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 15-Jun-2026

    Objections Not Removed (Second Time)

    Shri Rajesh A. Sasne (Registrar Judl.)

  5. 08-Jun-2026

    Objections Not Removed (First Time)

    Shri Pradeep B. Ghuge (Registrar Judl.)

  6. 04-May-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 13-Nov-2025

    Case filed

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court at Aurangabad, in 37 consolidated writ petitions (WPST Nos. 24955/2025 to 1502/2026), granted petitioners a final two-week extension to remove office objections. The court warned that failure to comply will result in automatic refusal of registration without further notice, as petitioners failed to appear despite two prior opportunities. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case