Allowed

Momin Mahila Mandal Nanded and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC18 Dec 2012CA/11330/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the current recall applications but allowed them to restore earlier petitions dismissed in 2008 for want of prosecution. It determined that the underlying writ petitions concerning a 2007 government circular were infructuous and disposed of without considering their merits.

What did the court decide?

Orders passed on 27.03.2008 dismissing petitions for want of prosecution are recalled; petitions are restored and then disposed of as infructuous.

Momin Mahila Mandal Nanded and Ors. Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

{1}

¶2

CA No.11330/2009

¶3

drp

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11330 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6079 OF 2007

¶6

Momin Mahila Mandal, Nanded & Others APPLICANTS

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS

¶9

WITH

¶10

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11337 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6071 OF 2007

¶11

Koushalya Mahila Audyogic Utpadak
Sahakari Sanstha Ltd.,

¶12

 APPLICANT

¶13

VERSUS

¶14

The State of Maharashtra & others

¶15

 RESPONDENTS

¶16

.......

¶17

Mr.Vaibhav Deshmukh h/f Mr.Amol Gandhi, Advocate for
applicants

¶18

Mr. S.N.Kendre, AGP for respondent State

¶19

.......

¶20

[CORAM : R. M. BORDE AND U. D. SALVI, J.J.]

¶21

DATE : 18th DECEMBER 2012

¶22

PER COURT:

¶23

1.These are applications seeking recall of the

¶24

order passed by this Court on 27.03.2008 dismissing
the petitions for want of prosecution. Considering the

¶25

{2} CA No.11330/2009

¶26

contentions raised in these applications, both the
applications deserve to be allowed and the same are
accordingly allowed. The orders passed by this Court
on 27.03.2008 are recalled. The petitions are restored
to their original number.

¶27

 [U.D.SALVI, J.]

¶28

drp/A12/ca1133009

¶29

{3}

¶30

CA No.11330/2009

¶31

drp

¶32

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶33

WRIT PETITION NO.6079 OF 2007

¶34

Momin Mahila Mandal, Nanded & Others PETITIONERS

¶35

VERSUS

¶36

The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS

¶37

WITH

¶38

WRIT PETITION NO.6071 OF 2007

¶39

Koushalya Mahila Audyogic Utpadak
Sahakari Sanstha Ltd.,

¶40

 PETITIONER

¶41

VERSUS

¶42

The State of Maharashtra & others

¶43

 RESPONDENTS

¶44

.......

¶45

Mr.Vaibhav Deshmukh h/f Mr.Amol Gandhi, Advocate for
petitioners

¶46

Mr. S.N.Kendre, AGP for respondent State

¶47

.......

¶48

[CORAM : R. M. BORDE AND
 U. D. SALVI, J.J.]

¶49

DATE : 18th DECEMBER 2012

¶50

PER COURT:

¶51

1.These petitions are presented raising

¶52

challenge to the Circular issued by the Government on
05.10.2007 in respect of allotment of works to the
Self Help Groups. The petitions were presented in the

¶53

{4} CA No.11330/2009

¶54

year 2007 and by passing of time the petitions have
been rendered infructuous. Nothing survives in these
petitions for consideration. The petitions, therefore,
stand disposed of.

¶55

drp/A12/ca1133009

Momin Mahila Mandal Nanded and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Momin Mahila Mandal Nanded and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

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

Anil Hiralal Bhandari Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Vasant Sahadu Kamble Vs Central Bank of India and Anr.

Mahatma Phule Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Nandurbar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Surekha Babruwan Natave Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Deelip Pandurang Bankar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Gajanan Sukhdeo Palkar and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.