M.S Shirish And Company Represented By Its Partner v. Chairman And Managing Director, H.P. Corporation And ORS
2026:BHC-AUG:7970-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12806 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.12956 OF 2025 M/s. Shirish and Company represented by its Principal Partner Mr. Shirish D Ostwal
Versus
Union of India and others ...
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.14323 OF 2025 IN REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO.64 OF 2024 IN WP/3416/2024 M/s. Shirish and Company represented by its Founder Partner Mr. Dalichand Oswal
Versus
Chairman and Managing Director, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and others ...
WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.843 OF 2026 IN REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO.64 OF 2024 IN WP/3416/2024 M/s. Shirish and Company represented by its Founder Partner Mr. Dalichand Oswal
Versus
Chairman and Managing Director, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited and others ...
Mr. Duraisamy Baskaran, Advocate h/f Ms. Ranjana D. Reddy, Advocate for the applicants.
Mr. R. D. Sanap, Central Government Counsel for respondent No.1 in CA/12806/2025.
Ms. Anjali Dube, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 16 in CA/12806/2025. ...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 21 JANUARY 2026 PRONOUNCED ON : 24 FEBRUARY 2026 [1]
ORDER (Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.) :- .
Civil Application No.12806 of 2025 has been filed for stay / status quo and amendment. The learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the copy of the application has been served on the other side, however, it is to be noted that there is no acknowledgment annexed along with the application or the service affidavit of the same has not been filed.
2.
Civil Application No.14323 of 2025 has been filed in the review application, wherein the applicant prays that the respondent be debarred from filing their affidavit in review application due to their intentional failure to comply with the order passed this Court on 24.11.2025. Civil Application No.843 of 2026 has been filed to pass an order of No Say against the respondents.
3.
The first and the foremost fact to be noted is that there is no such procedure of passing No Say order. By order dated 24.11.2025, affidavitin-reply has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 16, which was then taken on record. After we had heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner for substantial time, we found that there is also a review application in the connected matter. Notice of review application was not issued to the respondents and, therefore, by said order dated 24.11.2025, [2]
we had issued notices to respondent Nos.1 to 6 in Review Application No.64 of 2024 and then given time to them to file affidavit-in-reply, if any, within a period of three weeks. If the affidavit is not filed, then automatically the matter would come up for hearing in absence of such affidavit-in-reply. Still, it would be in the discretion of this Court to allow any party to tender the affidavit, provided a copy of the same is given to the other side in advance. It appears that unnecessarily the applications have been filed with a prayer for passing order of No Say and, therefore, we do not find any merit in Civil Application Nos.14323 of 2025 and 843 of 2026. Both the applications stand rejected. 4.
As regards Civil Application No.12806 of 2025 is concerned, we direct the parties to submit their submissions on the next date i.e. 24.03.2026.
[ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ] JUDGE JUDGE scm [3]