Bombay High Court
WP/3864/2025 of Ashok Devji Wadher Vs The State of Maharashtra through the Chief Secretary on 15 October 2026
Ashwini IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Ashwini
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 3864 OF 2025
Ashok Devji Wadher & Anr.
...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
...Respondents
...
Adv. Nirmal Pagaria, for the Petitioners.
Mr. S. B. Gore, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2-State.
Mr. Sunil Karoth for Respondent No.3.
...
CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
DATE : 15th OCTOBER, 2026.
P.C.:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The instant Writ Petition is preferred under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the validity of the Impugned Order dated 9th April 2025 passed by Respondent No.2 – The President, Parents and Senior Citizen Maintenance Tribunal and Sub Division Officer but on the ground that the same is not in consonance of provisions of the Maintenance And Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 (“the Act” for short).
3. At the outset, learned Counsel for the Respondents submits that the Petitioners have an alternate efficacious remedy of filing an Appeal before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 16 of the Act. In view thereof, there is no reason to bypass such statutory appellate remedy.
4. After substantial arguments, at this stage, learned Counsel for the Petitioners fairly submits that they are inclined to avail the alternate remedy of filing an Appeal under Section 16 of the Act. Accordingly, he submits that the instant Writ Petition may be disposed of as not pressed and leave may be accorded to the Petitioners to approach the Appellate Tribunal by way an Appeal under Section 16 of the Act.
5. In the above facts and circumstances, leave is granted to the Petitioners to prefer an Appeal before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 16 of the Act against the Impugned Order dated 9th April 2025. In case any such Appeal is preferred within a period of one week from the date of uploading of this order, the same shall be considered on merits and the period of limitation shall not come in the way of the Appellate Tribunal while deciding such Appeal.
6. We clarify that we have not adverted to the merits of the matter, leaving all contentions of the parties open.
7. In view of the above observations/directions, the Writ Petition stands dismissed as not pressed. [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE]