Allowed

Indiana Restaurant and Bar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC27 Sept 2010WP/1820/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged suspension of its police license. Court held that without a show cause notice backed by a compilation of documents, proceedings cannot proceed. Dismissed impugned orders, remitted for fresh hearing with document disclosure, and granted a two-week delay for adverse order implementation.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders set aside; proceedings remitted for fresh hearing with document compilation; two-week stay on adverse order implementation.

Indiana Restaurant and Bar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

I N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

rpa

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1820 OF 2010

¶5

Indian Restaurant & Bar .. Petitioner. v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents.

¶6

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

¶7

CORAM : S. J. KATHAWALLA, J.

¶8

DATE : SEPTEMBER 27, 2010.

¶9

P.C.

¶10

By this Petition the Petitioner has impugned the order dated 12^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. 58/Tardeo 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 compilation of

¶11

¶12

documents, on the basis of which a show cause notice was issued

¶13

to the Petitioner and orders passed thereon. In view thereof, by consent of the parties the following order is passed :

¶14

(i) The orders dated 12^th May, 2010 and

¶15

18^th August, 2010, are set aside.

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

(v) The Deputy Commissioner shall give a hearing

¶21

to the Petitioner and pass a fresh order within four

¶22

weeks from the date of this order.

¶23

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

¶24

[ S. J. KATHAWALLA, J. ]

Indiana Restaurant and Bar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indiana Restaurant and Bar 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

Statutes considered

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.

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