Allowed

Ravi Saheb Rajpute v. Dhruvati Sadanand Dalwai and Others

Bombay HC5 Jan 2010LPA/291/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench disposed of four Letters Patent Appeals and their accompanying civil applications based on filed Minutes of Order. The court modified the impugned stay order against disqualification of councilors, allowing their continued tenure without voting, attending proceedings, or drawing remuneration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order modified to allow respondents to remain councilors without voting, attending proceedings, or drawing remuneration; civil applications dismissed as infructuous.

Ravi Saheb Rajpute Vs Dhruvati Sadanand Dalwai and… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

LETTERS PETENT APPEAL NO. 291 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 9261 OF 2009

¶4

WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (L) NO. 329 OF 2009 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 291 OF 2009

¶5

Ravi Saheb Rajpute ........Appellant

¶6

versus

¶7

Sou. Dhruvati S. Dalvi & ors.. .Respondents.

¶8

WITH LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 292 OF 2009

¶9

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO. 9263 OF 2009

¶11

WITH

¶12

CIVIL APPLICATION (L) NO. 330 OF 2009 IN

¶13

L.P.A. NO.292 OF 2009

¶14

Ravi Saheb Rajpute ...... Appellant

¶15

versus

¶16

Sou Varsha D. Dhere & ors .... Respondents.

¶17

WITH

¶18

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 293 of 2009

¶19

¶20

WRIT PETITION NO. 9537 OF 2009

¶21

WITH

¶22

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 331 OF 2009

¶23

¶24

L.P.A. NO. 292 OF 2009

¶25

Ravi Saheb Rajpute .... Appellant

¶26

¶27

versus

¶28

Sou. Sarika Tanaji Bhokare & ors. ..... Respondents.

¶29

WITH

¶30

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 294 OF 2009

¶31

¶32

WRIT PETITION NO. 9535 OF 2009

¶33

WITH

¶34

CIVIL APPLICAT6ION (L) NO. 332 OF 2009

¶35

¶36

L.P.A. NO. 294 OF 2009

¶37

Ravi Saheb Rajpute .... Appellant

¶38

versus

¶39

Sou Padmavati Chandrakant Bhandare & ors. ... Respondents.

¶40

WITH

¶41

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 295 OF 2009 IN

¶42

WRIT PETITION 9536 OF 2009

¶43

WITH

¶44

CIVIL APPLICATION (L) NO. 333 OF 2009

¶45

¶46

L.P.A. NO. 295 OF 2009

¶47

Ravi Saheb Rajpute ..... Appellant

¶48

versus

¶49

Sou. Rabia Salim Bagwan & ors ...... Respondents.

¶50

Mr. M.L. Patil for the Appellant.

¶51

Mr. P.K. Dhakephalkar Sr. adv. i/b. P.P.Kulkarni for respondent no.1.

¶52

Mr. V.P. Malvankar for respondent nos. 2 and 3. Mr. T.S. Ingale for respondent no.4. Mr. S.B.Shetye for respondent no.6.

¶53

¶54

CORAM: J. N. PATEL Acting. C.J.,& B. R. GAVAI, J. DATED : 5th January, 2010.

¶55

P.C.:

¶56

The parties have tendered Minutes of Order signed by their counsel as their representatives and pray that the Letters Patent Appeals be disposed of accordingly.

¶57

Minutes of Order is taken on record and marked as `X’ for identification in all the three Letters Patent Appeals. 3. The impugned order dated 20-11-2009 passed in Writ Petition/s is modified as follows:

¶58

Subject to para 3 below there will be stay of the operation of the order dated 17-09-2009 passed by the Collector, Satara in Disqualification Application no.2 of 2009.

¶59

The Respondents will remain Councilors of the Ichalkaranji Municipal Council except to the extent restricted by para 3 below so long as the stay order lasts or their tenure as Councilors expire whichever is earlier.

¶60

The Respondents will be entitled to attend and sign the register kept for attendance but they will neither participate in the proceedings in the council nor vote nor draw remuneration in their capacity as Councilors of the Ichalkaranji Municipal Council.

¶61

It will be open for the parties to move the learned

¶62

¶63

Single Judge for expeditious disposal of the Writ Petition. On such request being made the learned Single Judge would consider the same sympathetically.

¶64

All the above appeals stand disposed of accordingly with no orders as to costs.

¶65

In view of the disposal of appeals, Civil Applications for interim relief does not survive and the same are also dismissed as infructuous.

Ravi Saheb Rajpute v. Dhruvati Sadanand Dalwai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Saheb Rajpute v. Dhruvati Sadanand Dalwai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. D.V. Bhore Vs Shri Swami Vivekanand Shikshan Sanstha and Others

Raju Z.Moray. Vs Univercity of Bombay and Ors.

Amcon Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs New Azad Co-Operativem Housing Society Ltd. and Ors.

Ravi Saheb Rajpute Vs Dhruvati Sadanand Dalwai and Others

Vijay Kamat Vs State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.

Abid Ali Ahmed Ali Tanwar and 2 Ors. Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Slum Rehabilitation Authority and 2 Ors.