Dismissed

Shaikh Shafi F. M. Dilliwale and Ors. v. Dr. Krishna Lavekar and Ors.

Bombay HC3 Mar 2009LPA/63/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal against a single judge order that stayed matters before the Hon'ble Minister pending his decision. The appellate bench set a six-week deadline for the Minister to decide the pending matter. Pending such decision, the court directed the parties to maintain status quo. The appeal was dismissed on merits.

What the court decided

AI extract

Shaikh Shafi F. M. Dilliwale and Ors. Vs Dr. Krishna… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 63 OF 2009

¶4

IN

¶5

 WRIT PETITION NO. 2676 OF 2009

¶6

 Shaikh Shafi M.F. Dilliwale

¶7

 & Ors. .. Appellants.

¶8

vs.

¶9

 Dr. Krishna Lavekar

¶10

 & Ors. .. Respondents.

¶11

 Mr. Y.R. Naik with G.S. Kulkarni i/by Prashant

¶12

 Naik for Appellants.

¶13

 Mr. S.R. Waghmare for Respondent No. 2.

¶14

 Mr. R.D. Pote for Respondent No. 3.

¶15

 Mr. V.S. Masurkar, GP., with S.N. Patil, AGP.,

¶16

 for Respondent No. 4.

¶17

CORAM: J.N. PATEL, &

¶18

 SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI,JJ.

¶19

DATE: 3RD MARCH, 2009.

¶20

 P.C.

¶21

 . This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by

¶22

 the Appellants against the decision of the learned
 Single Judge dated 2nd March, 2009 disposing of the

¶23

¶24

 petition with the observation that the matter before
 the Hon’ble Minister is already closed for orders and
 that the Hon’be Minister has not yet passed any order
 in spite of written arguments having been submitted.
 Therefore, the learned Single Judge has given liberty
 to the appellants/petitioners that if there is any
 urgency the parties are at liberty to apply before the
 concerned Minister for appropriate interim relief.

¶25

 2. We do not find that the impugned order suffers
 from any error or illegality and, therefore, we dismiss
 this LPA but before dismissing the LPA we would like to
 observe that it will be proper for the Hon’ble Minister
 to decide the matter as expeditiously as possible and
 in any case within six weeks from the date of
 communication of this order. We make it clear that if
 the Hon’ble Minister is not in a position to decide the
 matter within the aforesaid period, he may pass
 appropriate interim orders so that the rights of the
 parties which are being dealt with in the appeal are
 sufficiently protected till the decision of the appeal
 so as to maintain status quo on the date the impugned
 order was passed. In the meantime, to protect the
 rights of the parties, we direct the parties to
 maintain status quo till the Hon’ble Minister takes a
 decision in the matter in accordance with law.

¶26

¶27

 3. The appellant to communicate this order to the
 Hon’ble Minister.

¶28

 4. Authenticated copy of this order be furnished
 to the learned counsel for the parties to act upon it.

¶29

 (J.N. Patel, J.)

¶30

 (Smt. V.K. Tahilramani, J.)

Shaikh Shafi F. M. Dilliwale and Ors. v. Dr. Krishna Lavekar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shaikh Shafi F. M. Dilliwale and Ors. v. Dr. Krishna Lavekar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vimal H. Varhadi and 24 Ors. Vs the Chief Executive Officer, and 5 Ors.

Transport and Dock Workers Union and Anr. Vs Oil and Natural Gas Corpn. Ltd. and Ors.

Soleri Land Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors, and Parul Enterprises Rep. by C.D. Shah (H.U.F.)

Zubeda Rajmohammad Qureshi Vs the Municipal Corpn. of Gr. Bombay and 4 Ors.

Dr.Shirish G.Deshpande Vs Smt.Nathibai Damodar Thackersay Women'S University and Ors.

Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Vs University of Mumbai and Ors.