Sunil Vishnu Agrawal And Another v. Sub Divisional Officer, Washim And Others

2026:BHC-NAG:2128-DB 5 wp 148-2026.odt 1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 148 OF 2026 1.

Sunil Vishnu Agrawal aged 65 years, occupation agriculturist and business, 2.

Sanjay Vishnu Agrawal, aged 58 years, occupation agriculturist and business, Both resident of Gandhi Chowk, Ansing Washim, Tahsil and District Washim now residing at Flat No.

108, Sanman Garden, Borban, Wajirabad, Nanded, District Nanded ...PETITIONERS

VERSUS

1.

Sub Divisional Officer, Washim, Tahsil and District Washim 2.

Principal Secretary, Scrutiny Committee and Dy. Director ® Aurangabad, District Aurangabad 3.

Prakash Haribhau Chavan, aged 65 years, occupation agriculturist, resident of Ansing, Washim, Tahsil and District Washim 4.

Tahsildar, Washim, Distt Washim ...RESPONDENTS

5 wp 148-2026.odt 2/3 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri S.S Deshpande, Advocate for petitioners Ms H.S. Dhande, AGP for respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4/State --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CORAM

:

SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR AND NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE :

09.02 .2026 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER :

NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.

) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2.

Heard finally by the consent of the parties.

3.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader waives notice for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4.

4.

As pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, respondent No.3 has expired.

5.

Leave to delete the name of respondent No.3 from the array of respondents.

6.

In that view of the matter, all the respondents are before this Court.

5 wp 148-2026.odt 3/3 7.

The order impugned is dated 24.06.2025, passed by the Scrutiny Committee, which categorically records the findings, that the fact of the death of the respondent No.3 was well before the authority, and the said fact was recorded on 17.06.2025, when the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner was also present. In that view of the matter, the challenge to the petition is misconceived. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners to move before the authority in view of the death of the respondent No.3, i.e., Prakash Haribhau Chavan, who was the non-applicant before the authority, by filing appropriate application. Needless to mention that the Scrutiny Committee would decide the said application in accordance with law.

8.

Petition is disposed of as such.

9.

Rule accordingly. No order as to costs.

(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) Jayashree..