Remanded

Sayli Shashikant Haldankar v. the Chairman, Shri Bhairav Seva Samiti and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Feb 2006WP/1542/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court of Bombay set aside a non-speaking order dated 15.12.2003 and remanded the matter to the Additional Chief Executive Officer for fresh hearing. The Court directed the respondent to allow time for a rejoinder and dispose of grievances within a specified timeframe while an interim order continued.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 15.12.2003 set aside; matter remanded to respondent No. 6 for hearing afresh and passing reasoned order.

Sayli Shashikant Haldankar Vs the… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

 -: 1 :-

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION

¶3

 WRIT PETITION NO. 1542 OF 2004

¶4

 Mrs. Sayli Shashikant Haldankar ..Petitioner.

¶5

Vs.

¶6

 The Chairman/President/Secretary/Trea-
 surer, Shri Bhairav Seva Samiti & Ors. ..Respondents.

¶7

---

¶8

 Mr. Sunil Dighe for the Petitioner.
 Mrs. M.P. Thakur AGP for Respondent Nos.5,7 & 10.
 Mr. R.V.Govilkar for Respondents Nos. 1,2,8 & 9.

¶9

 -----

¶10

CORAM : F.I. REBELLO AND
 Dr.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,JJ.

¶11

DATED : 06TH FEBRUARY, 2006.
P.C.:

¶12

 1. The impugned order dated 15.12.2003, being a
 non-speaking order, will have to be set aside and the
 matter be remanded back to respondent No. 6 for hearing
 afresh and by passing a fresh order and giving reasons
 thereof.

¶13

 2. On behalf of the petitioner, the learned counsel
 pointed out that the respondents have filed replies to
 which he will have to file a rejoinder. Considering the
 order to be passed, it will be open to the petitioner
 herein to make a detailed representation to respondent
 No.6. On such representation, if made within a period

¶14

 -: 2 :-

¶15

 of two weeks from today, the respondent No. 6 to issue
 notice to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 as also respondent
 Nos. 8 and 9 and after allowing them to file the reply,
 the respondent No.6 to dispose of the grievances as
 raised by the petitioner herein within a period of 16
 weeks thereafter.

¶16

 3. In the meantime and till the disposal of the
 said representation, the interim order granted in favour
 of the petitioner on April 01, 2004 will continue till
 the hearing and final disposal of the petitioner’s
 representation and, if the order is adverse, for a
 period of four weeks thereafter from the date of the
 communication of the order to the petitioner.

¶17

 4. In the event, the post of Additional Chief
 Executive Officer is vacant and or the incumbent is not
 available then the Chief Executive Officer to hear and
 dispose of the representation/ application. Rule made
 absolute accordingly. The petition is disposed of.

¶18

 06.02.2006 (F.I.Rebello,J)

¶19

 (Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud,J)

Sayli Shashikant Haldankar v. the Chairman, Shri Bhairav Seva Samiti and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sayli Shashikant Haldankar v. the Chairman, Shri Bhairav Seva Samiti and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sarvodaya Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and Ors. Vs the Union of India and Ors.

Manikchand Motilal Kataria and Anr. Vs Union of India and Anr.

The Deputy Collector and Competent Authority and Ors. Vs M/S.Deshmukh Builders Pvt.Ltd. and Anr.

Godavari Manar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vs the Nanded District Central Co-Op. Bank Ltd. and Ors.

Kuber Maruti Mane and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Nabhik Sahkari Pat Sanstha Mumbai Ltd. and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.