Disposed

Reliance Industries Limited and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtr through the Principal Secretary Industry (Industries ,Energy and Labour) an

Bombay HC24 Sept 2009WP/2392/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Bombay CAJ, disposed of a Writ Petition regarding an expedited appeal under the Electricity Duty Act. Acknowledging an alternative remedy, the Court granted liberty to file an appeal barring delay based on the expired limitation period, mandating a decision within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed. Liberty granted to file appeal. Impugned order to remain in operation until appeal is decided or one week after appeal order.

Reliance Industries Limited and Anr. Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 2392 OF 2009

¶4

Reliance Industries Limited and another ).. Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and others

¶7

).. Respondents

¶8

Mr. Aspi Chinoy a/w Mr. Chirag Balsara i/b M/s Junnarkar & Associates for the Petitioners. Mr. V.A. Sonpal, A-Panel Advocate, for the State.

¶9

CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND A.M. KHANWILKAR, J. DATED : 24TH SEPTEMBER 2009

¶10

P.C.

¶11

The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent State takes an objection that there is a statutory alternative remedy available to the Petitioners and as such this Court cannot exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We find merits in this submission. However, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that they will file the Appeal, but the limitation provided under Section 7A of the Bombay Electricity Duty Act, 1958 has expired as the Petitioners were prosecuting their remedy before this Court. He also relies upon the interim order passed by another Division Bench of this Court on 18^th February 2009.

¶12

¶13

In view of the above, we dispose of this Writ Petition with liberty to the Petitioners to file Appeal in accordance with law. The said Appeal shall be decided on its own merits and not to be thrown out on the ground of delay. Further, we would expect the concerned authority to hear the Appeal expeditiously and pass appropriate orders within four weeks from the filing of the Appeal. In the meanwhile, the order dated 18^th February 2009 shall continue, subject to such orders as may be passed by the concerned authority or till one week after passing of the order by the concerned authority. If the order is adverse to the interest of the Petitioners, but for the period stated hereinabove, the amounts will be liable to be paid.

¶14

Writ Petition disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.

¶15

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶16

A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.

Reliance Industries Limited and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtr through the Principal Secretary Industry (Industries ,Energy and Labour) an

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reliance Industries Limited and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtr through the Principal Secretary Industry (Industries ,Energy and Labour) an

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Nashik District Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd. and Anr. Vs Subhash Sayaji Thakare

Jagdambadevi Seva Mandal Vs M.M.R.D.A. (Muip) and Another

Jitendra R Mehra and 1 Ors. Vs Industrial Investment Bank of India Ltd.

Kirti Shyamji Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Dabur India Ltd. Vs Daxal Cosmetics Private Limited and Anr. and Commissioner of Customs and Anr.

Shaikh Jameel Ahmad and 1 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.