Dismissed
Ajay J. Beri v. Union of India and Ors.
Bombay HCCAI/9/2008
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY…
What the court decided
AI extract
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 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9 OF 2008
IN
PIL NO. 23 OF 2007
Ajay J. Beri
.. Petitioner..
Vs.
Union of India & Ors... .. Respondents
Ms. Shaila R. Pandey for the petitioner.
Mr. Vijay Patil for respondent No. 8.
Mr. S.K. Chinchalikar, AGP., for respondent nos. 2 to 5 & 7.
CORAM : J. N. PATEL &
A.A. SAYED,, JJ DATE : 24TH JULY, 2009 (INCHAMBER AT 2.45 P.M.)
P.C. :
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
the learned counsel for the petitioner on 24.8.2007 after hearing the
2
parties who were present.
the subject matter of the petition requires to be dealt on merits it was disposed of on the day the petition was listed for MSRDC to file their affidavit in reply being joined as a party respondent. Mr. Patil, the learned counsel for MSRDC states that MSRDC is not concerned with the subject matter as they are not accountable for regulating the public goods carriages who are carrying load more than the capacity and for which weigh bridges are required to be installed which is not their job and that the MSRDC’s function is restricted to collection of toll in respect of the roads which have
been developed under BOT scheme within the jurisdiction of the MSRDC. We are of the view that as MSRDC has made its stand clear and there is nothing placed on record to show that the MSRDC is an authority who is supposed to have weigh bridges to check the irregularity /illegality committed by the truck operators, it does not subserve any purpose to recall our order and restore the petition. We, therefore, dismiss the civil application for restoration.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the civil application for restoration of PIL No. 23 of 2007 should be allowed after the petitioner's absence from court on 24.8.2007.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ajay J. Beri
Union of India
Maharashtra State Road Development Corporation
J. N. Patel
A. A. Sayed
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court