Disposed

Gajanan Madhavrao Aghav v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC28 Jul 2009WP/3030/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought execution of a recovery certificate under the Payment of Gratuity Act. The Court permitted the intervening Bank to file objections regarding a mortgage on the sugar factory and directed the Collector to decide those objections within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Permitted intervenor Bank to submit objections; directed Collector to decide objections within four weeks and communicate decision.

Gajanan Madhavrao Aghav Vs the State of Mah… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2009)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.3030 OF 2009

¶5

Gajanan Madhavrao Aghav,
Age : 56 years, Occup.Agriculture,
R/o Opp. Chanakya Hotel,
Bhagyanagar,
Old Jalna ..PETITIONER
VERSUS

¶6

1. The State of Maharashtra (Through its Secretary, Mantralaya, Mumbai)

¶7

2. The Collector, Jalna, Jalna

¶8

3. The Tahsildar, Jalna, Jalna

¶9

4. The Managing Director Jalna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ramnagar, Jalna

¶10

5. The Maharashtra State Co-operative Bank Ltd., Mumbai, Regional office at Aurangabad, Through It’s Grade-I Officer Shri Sudhir Mahadeo Mhetre, Age : 47 years, Occu.service, R/o Town Centre, CIDCO, Cannought Place, Aurangabad ..RESPONDENTS

¶11

Mr P.A. Kulkarni, Advocate for the petitioner;

¶12

¶13

Mr V.H. Dighe, AGP for respondents no.1 to 3;
Mr Sandeep Gorde Patil, Advocate for respondent no.
5/intervenor.

¶14

CORAM: P.V. HARDAS AND
 A.V. POTDAR, JJ.

¶15

 DATE : 28th JULY, 2009

¶16

ORAL JUDGMENT: [PER P.V. HARDAS, J.]

¶17

Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the
consent of learned Counsel for the parties this
petition is heard finally at the stage of admission.

¶18

2.The petitioner by this petition prays for
directing the respondent – Collector to execute the
recoverycertificateissuedbytheLabour
Commissioner, Aurangabad under the Payment of Gratuity
Act for the amount stated therein. The learned
Counsel for the intervenor – Bank states that the
aforesaid certificate would only be executed upon sale
of the immovable property belonging to the respondent
– sugar factory, which now stands mortgaged to the
intervenor. In the light of that, therefore, we
permit the intervenor Bank to submit its objections,
if any, to the Collector within two weeks from today
and direct the Collector to decide the said objections
in accordance with law within a period of four weeks
thereafter and communicate the decision to the parties
to the present petition. Certificate to be executed
only after objections, if submitted by the intervenor-
Bank, is decided.

¶19

¶20

3.Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms
with no order as to costs.

¶21

4.Copy of this judgment duly authenticated by the
Court Sheristedar of this Court be issued to the
learned Counsel for the intervenor to act upon.

¶22

amj/wp3030.09

¶23

¶24

WRIT PETITION NO.3030 OF 2009

¶25

Date of decision : 28th July, 2009
For approval and signature.

¶26

T HE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE P.V. HARDAS

¶27

`THE`	`HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE A.V. POTDAR`
1.	Whether Reporters of Local Papers `may be allowed to see the judgment?`	} `} Yes.`
`2.`	`To be referred to the Reporter or not?`	`} Yes/No`
`3.`	`Whether Their Lordships wish to see` `the fair copy of the judgment?`	`} No.`
`4.`	`Whether this case involves a substantial` `question of law as to the interpretation` `of the Constitution of India, 1950 or` `any Order made thereunder?`	`}` `}` `}` `} No.`
`5.`	`Whether it is to be circulated to the` `Civil Judges?`	`}` `} No.`
`6.`	`Whether the case involves an important` `question of law and whether a copy of` `the judgment should be sent to Mumbai,` `Nagpur and Panaji offices?`	`}` `}` `}` `} No.`

¶28

 [Anant Joshi]
 Private Secretary to
 the Honourable Judge.

¶29

Gajanan Madhavrao Aghav v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajanan Madhavrao Aghav v. the State of Mah 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

Narhari Bhujangrao Choudhari Vs Zilla Parishad Parbhani and Ors.

Mahadeo Kondiba Shinde Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Dr Layeeq Ur Rehman Mazhar Ali Khan Vs Abdul Hussain Chairman Raj Education and Charitable Trust and Ors.

Ramesh Raghunath Mahalinge Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Dyaneshwar Govind Patil Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Rajendra Govindrao Sakalkar Vs the State of Mah and Ors.