In this writ petition, the High Court of Bombay disposed of the matter stating that since the respondent State administration had taken a policy decision not to act if restaurants remain open until 1.30 a.m. with music, nothing survived in the petition for adjudication.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.331 OF 2009
Rajasekharan S. Nair Vs.
State of Maharashtra and others
... Petitioner
... Respondents
Mr. M.S. Samudrala for the petitioner. Mr. Shekhar Ingawale, Assistant Government Pleader for the State.
CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J. DATE : 20TH FEBRUARY, 2009
P.C.:
The learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State submits that a policy decision has been taken by the State administration not to take any action if the restaurants are kept open till 1.30 a.m. with orchestra played by male or female singers. However, if the other activities which are impermissible in law are being carried out, the authorities concerned/police can take action in accordance with law.
CHIEF JUSTICE
DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging a policy decision regarding restaurant timings and music survives for adjudication.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to reliefs after the respondent State indicated that no action would be taken on the stated policy.
Rajasekharan S. Nair
State of Maharashtra
Swatanter Kumar
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
