Shabina Entertainment Vs State of Maharashtra & Anr (Bombay High Court)
In Shabina Entertainment vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr., the Bombay High Court dismissed a petition challenging an order dated July 10, 2024, on the grounds that the petitioner had not exhausted alternate remedies. The petitioner argued that no effective alternative remedy was available and requested the court to exercise its discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution. However, the court found no substantial basis to deviate from the established principle that litigants must first pursue available statutory remedies before approaching the High Court. Citing previous rulings in Atharvan Minerals Pvt Ltd vs. Union of India & Ors. and Oberoi Constructions Ltd vs. The Union of India and Others, the court emphasized the growing trend of bypassing alternative forums and filing writ petitions prematurely.
Consequently, the court directed the petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate authority within four weeks, ensuring that the appeal would be entertained on its merits without being dismissed for delay. The court clarified that the petition was possibly filed within the statutory limitation period based on legal advice, allowing the appellate authority to consider it without addressing the issue of limitation. The case highlights the judiciary’s firm stance on enforcing the exhaustion of remedies principle while allowing genuine litigants an opportunity to present their grievances before the proper forums.
