This court disposed of a criminal writ petition where the petitioner sought directions against respondents to quickly decide their application for a video parlour licence, which had not yet been considered.
Respondent No.2 directed to dispose of the petitioner's application within 4 weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
:1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1715 OF 2005
--------------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Court’s or Judge’s orders
Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court’s
orders or directions
and Registrar’s orders
--------------------------------------------------------
Mr. N.P. Mishra for the
petitioner.
Mr. D.R. More, A.P.P. for the
State.
CORAM : S.S.PARKAR AND
ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ.
DATE : 05.9.2005
. Though the petitioner had
applied for licence for running a
Video Parlour on 4/7/2005, the
same was not considered so far by
respondent No.2 and therefore,
this petition seeking the
directions against the
respondents. The respondent No.2
is directed to dispose of the
application of the petitioner
within 4 weeks from the date of
:2:
the receipt of the order by him.
The petition shall stand disposed
of accordingly.
. Parties concerned to act
on a simple copy of this order,
duly authenticated by the
P.A./Sheristedar of this Court.
(S.S. PARKAR, J.)
(ANOOP V.MOHTA,J.]
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondent authority can be directed to dispose of the sanction application for a video parlour within a fixed time.
Petitioner
Respondents
S.S. Parkar
Anoop V. Mohta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court