6-WP-1535-2026 (C).doc Mayur IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1535 OF 2026 Tata Motors Ltd ...Petitioner Versus State Of Maharashtra Thr Urban Development And Ors ...Respondents ... Adv. Tikshta Modi, a/w Buvan Kanvathirtha Akhil Modi & Associates, for the Petitioner. Adv. Neha S. Bhide, GP, Mrs. Apurva Thipsay, ‘B’ Panel, for the Respondent No. 1. ... CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J. DATE : 24th SEPTEMBER, 2026. P.C.: 1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the Respondent. The substantive relief prayed for in this proceedings reads thus:- “(a) that this Hon' ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directing Respondent No. 2 to recall the Impugned Notice dated 08 January 2026 imposing penalty upon the Petitioner;” 2. The instant writ petition is filed assailing the Impugned Notice dated 8th January 2026 directing the Petitioner to make payment of penalties to the tune of Rs.2,30,53,127/-, in relation to alleged 1/3 MAYUR KONDIRAM ADANE Digitally signed by MAYUR KONDIRAM ADANE Date: 2026.09.28 11:10:04 +0530 6-WP-1535-2026 (C).doc breach of terms of tender floated for the selection of an eligible Bus Manufacturer to Design, Manufacture, supply, Commission and Support 400 CNG Non-AC BRT (BS-VI) buses (Tender No.14-CE- 2024). 3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has neither participated nor being awarded any work under the said tender and as such, the Impugned Notice dated 8th January 2026, is unsustainable. This is more particularly on the ground that the same is issued in complete contravention of the principles of natural justice. 4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that under such facts and circumstances, a direction may be issued to the Respondents not to take any coercive action against the Petitioner. Be that as it may. 5. In the given facts before us, we are not inclined to advert to the merits of the case. More particularly as the challenge is only to the Impugned Notice, which has not culminated in any order passed by the Respondent - Authorities. We, accordingly, leave it open to the Petitioner to prefer an exhaustive Application/Representation before the Competent Authority within a period of one week from date of uploading of this order. In case such an Application/ Representation is filed, we expect the Competent Authority shall 2/3 6-WP-1535-2026 (C).doc process the same and decide the said Application/Representation on its own merits in accordance with law. 6. The Competent Authority to also offer a hearing to the Petitioner before deciding the Application/Representation of the Petitioner. Considering the nature of the issues and grievances raised by the Petitioner, the process as indicated above be completed expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months, from the Petitioner furnishing a certified copy of this Order before the Competent Authority of the Respondents. 7. With the above observations/directions, the Writ Petition stands Disposed of, without adverting to the merits of this matter. [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [CHIEF JUSTICE] 3/3