Vijay Govardhandas Rathod And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2026 Latest Caselaw 4877 Bom

Bombay High Court

Vijay Govardhandas Rathod And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 12 May, 2026

                                                              2-WP-6544-2026 (C).DOCX

                                                                                           Mayur


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 6544 OF 2026

Vijay Govardhandas Rathod And Anr                                        ...Petitioners
       Versus
State Of Maharashtra And Ors                                             ...Respondents

                          --------------------------------------------
Adv. Dhauan Shah, a/w Adv. Viral Babar, i/b Adv. Sanjay Dhadam, for
Petitioners.
Adv. Ashwini A. Purav, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 - State.
                          --------------------------------------------


                                    CORAM : ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.

DATED : 12 MAY 2026 P.C.:- (VACATION COURT)

1. Issue Notice to the Respondents.

2. Ms. Ashwini A. Purav, AGP wavies service for Respondent Nos. 1

and 2.

3. Mr. Shah, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, states that all

the Respondents, including Respondent No. 3, have been duly served. Let

the affidavit of service be filed in this regard by the end of the day.

4. Despite service, it appears that none is representing and/or appearing

2-WP-6544-2026 (C).DOCX

for Respondent No. 3.

5. Considering the nature of the petition and the reliefs sought therein at

this stage against the impugned order dated 11 March 2026 passed by the

Senior Citizen Tribunal, this Court considers it just, fair, and imperative to

hear Respondent No. 3 before passing any further orders. It is noted that the

impugned order dated 11 March 2026 was received by the Petitioner around

that time, as fairly stated by the learned counsel for the Petitioner.

6. Considering all of the above, this Court considers it appropriate to

grant an opportunity to the Petitioner to privately serve Respondent No. 3

once again through all permissible modes of private service and to file an

affidavit of service in that regard, including service of a copy of this order

passed today. It is only upon compliance with the above directions that the

Court shall consider passing any order tomorrow, i.e. 13 May 2026.

7. Parties to act on authenticated copy of this order.

8. Stand over to 13 May 2026.

(ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J)