Disposed

manubhai p. vashi v. state of maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Bombay HC9 Feb 2012PIL/40/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In PIL No.40/2006, the Bombay High Court directed the State to issue opportunity of hearing to alleged defaulters in security charge payments before undertaking recovery, consuming existing interim stay pending adjudication.

What did the court decide?

State to adjudicate amounts and recover after giving concerned persons opportunity of hearing; interim stay on further recovery from Kachare maintained.

manubhai p. vashi Vs state of maharashtra and 5 Ors. — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2012)

pil-40-06

SRK

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.40 OF 2006

¶5

Manubhai Paragji Vashi ... Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and others. ... Respondents

¶6

Mr. N.K. Singh i/by Mr. M.P. Vashi for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Saluja, Assistant Government Pleader for the State. Mr. Amit Borkar for the applicant.

¶7

CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & RANJIT MORE, J. Thursday, February 09, 2012

¶8

P.C.

¶9

The Principal Secretary, Home Department has filed affidavit dated 12 February 2007 giving names and particulars of the persons who are alleged to have defaulted in the payment of security charges.

¶10

Mr.Amit Borkar, learned counsel appearing for Shri Vishwasrao Kachare at serial No.115 of the said list, states that the amount payable by him was only about Rs.83,930/- and that he has already deposited the entire amount of Rs.83,930/-. It is, therefore, submitted that the claim made by the respondent-Government at about Rs.8 lakhs is without any basis, as his client was not provided security in three shifts and that only one security guard was provided.

¶11

The respondents shall take necessary steps for making recovery from the persons who are alleged to be in arrears after giving them an opportunity of hearing for determining the amount for which they are considered to be liable.

pil-40-06

SRK

As far as the intervenor Shri Kachare is concerned, this Court had earlier granted interim stay against the recovery of any further amount from Shri Kachare beyond the amount already indicated hereinabove.

¶16

In view of the above dispute, it is open to the Government to get the amount adjudicated and take steps for recovery after giving the concerned persons an opportunity of hearing.

¶17

Subject to the above direction regarding Shri Kachare, the State Government shall take necessary steps for recovery of the amounts due after giving the concerned persons an opportunity of being heard.

¶18

Subject to the above direction, petition stands disposed of

¶19

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶20

RANJIT MORE, J.

manubhai p. vashi v. state of maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

manubhai p. vashi v. state of maharashtra and 5 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

Dr. Santosh Sudhakarrao Kulkarni Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Shetkari Sangharsh Samitee and Anr. Vs the Additional Commissioner, Konkan Division and Ors.

The Courts on Its Own Motion Vs Nagpur Municipal Corporation Thr. Its Commissioner and Anr.

Ashish Rameshlal Shah Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Adarsha Nagar Nagarik Seva Samiti and Anr. Vs the Chief Officer, Mumbai Housing and Area Development Board and 4 Ors.

Dr. Kailash S/O Devideen Japsare Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Ors.

Shri Subhash S/O Deorao Langewar Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Ors.

Jitendra Narendra Shende Vs Collector, Amravati Division, Amravati

Geeta Chauhan Vs Mrs. Parveen Iqbal Sheikh and Anr.

Dnyaneshwar Ramdas Pote Vs Jyoti @ Manisha Dnyaneshwar Pote and Ors.

Javed Ahmed Mohammed Tauhid Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Katare Spining Mills Ltd. Vs Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.

Shail Rane and 2 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 9 Ors.

Shree Siyaram Fab Pvt. Ltd. Vs Siyaram Silk Mills Ltd. and Ors.