Disposed

Mulund Rohidas Nagar Sai Shraddha Co-Op.Hsg. Society Ltd.and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC23 Nov 2006WP/204/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought expeditious decision on their representation regarding land allotment after another party received the land. Court directed State Government to decide within three months and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed State Government to decide petitioner's representation within three months; petition disposed of with liberty to adopt appropriate proceedings.

Mulund Rohidas Nagar Sai Shraddha Co-Op.Hsg. Society… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

 .[1].

¶2

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

 WRIT PETITION NO.204 OF 1999

¶4

 Mulund Rohidas Nagar Sai
 Shraddha Co-operative
 Housing Society Ltd.,
 and Anr. ...Petitioners.
 Versus
 The State of Maharashtra
 and 6 Ors. ...Respondents.

¶5

 ....
 Mr.S.G.Surana, Advocate for the Petitioners.
 Mr.M.Kajale, A.G.P., for the State.
 Mr.V.Mahadik, Advocate for Respondent-B.M.C.

¶6

 CORAM : DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND
 SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,JJ.

¶7

 DATED : NOVEMBER 23, 2006.
 P.C.:

¶8

 1. Heard the learned counsel for the

¶9

 petitioners, the learned A.G.P. for the State and
 the learned counsel for the respondent-
 Corporation.

¶10

 2. Mr.Surana, the learned counsel for the
 petitioners states that respondent No.7 has
 already been allotted the land with regard to
 which the petitioners had made an application for
 allotment to the State Government. Mr.Surana, the
 learned counsel for the petitioners further states
 that since the land has already been allotted to

¶11

 .[2].

¶12

 respondent No.7, the petitioners have already made
 representation to the State Government seeking
 redressal. In view thereof, the learned counsel
 for the petitioners is not-pressing the above
 Petition. He only seeks relief that the
 representation of the petitioners should be
 decided by the State Government as expeditiously
 as possible.

¶13

 3. Under these circumstances, we direct the
 State Government to decide the said representation
 of the petitioners as expeditiously as possible,
 preferably within a period of three months from
 today.

¶14

 4. Writ Petition stands disposed of
 accordingly, with liberty to the petitioners to
 adopt appropriate proceedings if they have still
 any grievance. Interim order granted by this
 Court in favour of the petitioners also stands
 vacated.

¶15

 [DR.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.]

¶16

 .[3].

¶17

 [SMT.V.K.TAHILRAMANI,J.]

Mulund Rohidas Nagar Sai Shraddha Co-Op.Hsg. Society Ltd.and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mulund Rohidas Nagar Sai Shraddha Co-Op.Hsg. Society Ltd.and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union Bank Employees Trade Union Congress. Vs Union Bank of India and Ors.

Prakash S.Baviskar Vs Seva Ashram Sikshan Sanst Ha and Ors.

Sahebrao Rambhau Wagh Vs the Honble Chief Justice High Court Judicature at Bombay and Ors.

Sarva Shramik Sangh Vs M/S.Graha Firth Steel and Ors.

Mumbai Shramik Sangh Vs the Rashtriya Chemicals andFERTILISERS Ltd.and Ors.

Sanjay Sales Corpn. Vs National Aluminium Co.LTDand Ors.