The court held that an appeal against an order passed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable. It dismissed the application for condonation of 363-day delay and disposed of the appeal accordingly.
Application for condonation of delay dismissed; appeal disposed of.
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 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPICATION NO.94 OF 2009 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL ST.NO.4867 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 669 OF 2007
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
..Applicants.
v/s.
Konkan Sarvajanik Bandakam
..Respondent.
Mr.A. H. Palekar AGP for applicant. Mr. V.M.Parkar for Respondent.
CORAM:- SWATANTER KUMAR,CJ. AND A.M.KHANWILKAR, J
DATED :- DECEMBER 11, 2009.
P.C.
against the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 20/2/2008 on Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and while exercising power under that Article of Constitution. Appeal against such an order passed under Article 227, it is settled law as far as this Court is concerned, is not maintainable. Besides this fact, this appeal is barred by 363 days.
2
We see no reason to condone the delay. Hence the application for
condonation is dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
A.M.KHANWILKAR, J
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an appeal under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable.
Whether the application for condonation of delay should be allowed given the lapse of 363 days.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Konkan Sarvajanik Bandakam
Swatanter Kumar
A.M. Khanwilkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
