Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Hemant Gangadhar Bhamare vs State Of Maha. Thr. Sec. Market And Co-Op ... on 12 January, 2026

Author: R. I. Chagla

Bench: R. I. Chagla

 2026:BHC-AS:1264-DB
PALLAVI
MAHENDRA
WARGAONKAR                                                     1                  4-WP-8987-2023 (C).doc
Digitally signed by
PALLAVI MAHENDRA
WARGAONKAR                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Date: 2026.01.13
18:00:55 +0530
                                                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 8987 OF 2023

                       Hemant Gangadhar Bhamare                                       ...Petitioner
                             Versus
                       State Of Maha. Thr. Sec. Market And
                       Co-op Dept. And Ors.                                           ...Respondents
                                                        -----------------
                       Mr. Sanjay P. Shinde for the Petitioner.
                       Mr. P.N. Joshi a/w N.M. Pujari for the Respondent No.4.
                       Mr. Rajesh Kamble for Respondent No.5.
                                                        -----------------

                                                                   CORAM :   R. I. CHAGLA AND
                                                                             ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.

DATED : 12TH JANUARY, 2026 P.C.:-

1. By this Writ Petition, the Petitioner is seeking a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent No.4 to issue license in favour of the Petitioner and other 51 Mathadi workers performing the mathadi work in the premises of Respondent No.4 - Sub-Market Committee at Kanasi and Abhona under the administration and management of Respondent No.4.
2. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, Section 7 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Market (Development and Regulation) Act, 1963, provides for grant of licenses. It is provided therein that the Marketing Committee may, after making such inquiries as it deems fit, grant or renew a licence for the use of any place in the market area for marketing Pallavi 1/3 ::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 13/01/2026 20:38:21 :::

2 4-WP-8987-2023 (C).doc of the agricultural produce or operation therein as a trader, commission agent, broker, processor, weighman, measurer, surveyor, warehousemen or in any other capacity in relation to the marketing of agricultural produce, or may, after recording its reasons in writing thereof, refuse to grant or renew any such licence.

3. In the present case, the Petitioner claims to be working as mathadi worker in the premises of the Respondent No.4 - Marketing Committee.

4. There is no application made by the Petitioner or any of the other 51 mathadi workers who have been represented by the Petitioner to the Respondent No.4 - Marketing Committee in order for the provisions of Section 7 of the Act to be given effect to.

5. In view thereof, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner along with the other 51 mathadi workers will make an application to the Respondent No.4 - Mathadi Committee within a period of one week from today. The statement is accepted.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.4 - Marketing Committee, states that upon application being made by the Petitioner and other 51 mathadi workers, the application will be considered and an order passed thereupon within a period of four weeks from the making of the application. The statement is accepted.

7. In view of the above statements, the prayer in the Writ Petition which is for issuance of licence in favour of the Petitioner and 51 other mathadi Pallavi 2/3 ::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 13/01/2026 20:38:21 ::: 3 4-WP-8987-2023 (C).doc workers for performing mathadi work in the said premises of the subject market committee of Kanashi and Abhona is premature and the decision taken by the Respondent No.4 - Marketing Committee would have to be awaited.

8. Accordingly, Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

9. The rights and contentions of the parties of the above Writ Petition are expressly kept open and we have not considered the merits of the present Writ Petition.

               [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]                           [R.I. CHAGLA, J.]




Pallavi                                            3/3



                ::: Uploaded on - 13/01/2026                  ::: Downloaded on - 13/01/2026 20:38:21 :::