Allowed

M/S. Hotel Uma Palace, v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC27 Sept 2010WP/1819/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside a suspension order against a hotel's police license. The license was suspended without the petitioner receiving the compilation of documents for the show cause notice. The court remitted the case for a fresh hearing with the documents attached and granted a stay on enforcement.

What did the court decide?

The orders of 14th May 2010 and 18th August 2010 set aside; proceedings remitted for fresh hearing with documents; enforcement stayed for two weeks.

M/S. Hotel Uma Palace, Vs the State of Maharashtra — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

I N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

rpa

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 1819 OF 2010

¶6

Hotel Uma Palace .. Petitioner. v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents.

¶7

Mr. P. C. Kansara i/b. M/s. Kansara & Thanekar, for the Petitioner. Mr. R. R. Bhosale, A.G.P., for Respondents.

¶8

CORAM : S. J. KATHAWALLA, J.

¶9

DATE : SEPTEMBER 27, 2010.

¶10

P.C.

¶11

By this Petition the Petitioner has impugned the order dated 14^th May 2010, passed by the Respondent No.3 Deputy Commissioner of Police, H.Q.I. Licensing Authority, Hotel Branch Crawford Market, Mumbai, suspending the police license bearing No. 36/Mulund/2004 (111/1991) of the Petitioner for a period of 60 days and also the order dated 18^th August, 2010, passed by the Respondent No. 4 (the Hon’ble Home Minister, Government of Maharashtra) confirming the said order passed by the Respondent No.3. Admittedly, the Petitioner was not supplied with a

¶12

¶13

compilation of documents, on the basis of which a show cause notice was issued to the Petitioner and orders passed thereon. Since in several matters it is repeatedly argued on behalf of the petitioner that such compilation of documents is not handed over to the petitioner this Court by its detailed order dated 8^th September, 2010, directed the Respondent No.3 to file an undertaking by way of an affidavit that the Respondent No.3 shall alongwith the show cause notice forward to the noticee an entire compilation of documents in his possession against the noticee on the basis of which he issued a show cause notice and passes order thereon. The Respondent No. 3 has filed the necessary affidavit dated 21^st September, 2010. The said undertaking is accepted. In view thereof, by consent of the parties the following order is passed :

¶14

(i) The orders dated 14^th May 2010 and 18^th August, 2010, are set aside.

¶15

(ii) The proceedings are remitted back to the Respondent No. 3 for a fresh hearing and decision on the show cause notice after providing an entire

¶16

¶17

compilation of documents in his possession on the basis of which he has issued the show cause notice and intends to pass orders thereon.

¶18

(iii) In the event of the order being adverse to the Petitioner, the same shall not be implemented for a period of two weeks from the date of the service of the same on the Petitioner.

¶19

(iv) All contentions of the Petitioner are kept open.

¶20

(v) The Deputy Commissioner shall give a hearing to the Petitioner and pass a fresh order within six weeks from the date of this order.

¶21

The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of with no order as to costs.

¶22

[ S. J. KATHAWALLA, J. ]

M/S. Hotel Uma Palace, v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Hotel Uma Palace, v. the State of Maharashtra

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

S. Nikhil Vs Mardh Viks Electronics Pvt. Ltd.

Haldiram Foods International Limited Vs ----------------------------

Essar Engineering Services Limited Vs ----------------------------

Gurunath Kashinath Vaidya Vs the Mumbai Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 4 Ors.

Cine Costume Make Up Artists and Hair Dressers Association and Anr. Vs Smt. Sarita Dashrath Salvi Andors.

Indiana Restaurant and Bar Vs the State of Maharashtra