Disposed

Sindhubai Namdeo Vhatkar and Ors. v. the Revenue Minister, Revenue Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC5 Mar 2014WP/10007/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court addressed a writ petition concerning an undecided Revision Application. The court directed the petitioners to appear before the Revisional Authority within two months, mandated a decision on merits within two months from the specified date, and kept contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to appear before Revisional Authority within two months; Authority mandated to decide Revision Application within two months from date of appearance.

Sindhubai Namdeo Vhatkar and Ors. Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2014)

wp-10007.13

pmw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.10007 OF 2013

¶6

Sindhubai Namdeo Vhatkar and others

¶7

... Petitioners

¶8

V/s.

¶9

The Revenue Minister and others ... Respondents

¶10

¶11

Mr. Tushar Sonawanne, for the Petitioners. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP, for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.

¶12

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 5^th MARCH, 2014

¶13

P.C.

¶14

. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and the learned AGP for the Respondents. The grievance in the Petition is that a Revision Application preferred by the Petitioners on 4th January, 2012 before the State Government has not been decided. In the Petition, it is stated that on 6th March, 2012, the written arguments were submitted by the Petitioners and the Revision Application was closed for judgment. The learned AGP has no instructions as regards the status of the Revision Application. In view of the limited controversy, we dispose of the Petition by passing the following order :

¶15

ORDER

¶16

(i) We direct the Petitioners or their authorised

¶17

1 of 2

¶18

2 wp-10007.13

¶19

representative to appear before the Revisional Authority on 24th March, 2014 at 2.30 pm. The Petitioners or their authorised representative shall produce a true copy of the Revision Application filed on 4th January, 2012 along with an authenticated copy of this order before the Revisional Authority;

¶20

(ii) If the Revision Application is already decided, a copy of the order passed on the Revision Application be provided to the Petitioners on the date fixed for the appearance;

¶21

(iii) If the Revision Application is not yet decided, a fresh

¶22

date for hearing of the Revision Application shall be fixed on 24th March, 2014;

¶23

(iv) The Revision Application shall be decided as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of two months from 24th March, 2014;

¶24

(v) All contentions on merits are kept open;

¶25

(vi) Petition is disposed of on the above terms;

¶26

(vii) Parties to act upon the authenticated copy of this order.

¶27

(A.A. SAYED, J )

¶28

(A.S.OKA, J )

¶29

2 of 2

Sindhubai Namdeo Vhatkar and Ors. v. the Revenue Minister, Revenue Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sindhubai Namdeo Vhatkar and Ors. v. the Revenue Minister, Revenue Dept 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

Sandip Shrirang Waydande and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Rural Development and Ors.

Bhagwan Tama Dange and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Manjotra Jagindersingh Jaswant and Ors. Vs Saraswat Co. Operative Bank Ltd.

Shree Makai Shikshan Prasarak Va Sharir Savardhak Mandal and Anr. Vs the Assistant Charity Commissioner and Ors.

Shivputra Shankar Karambali and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Apasara Zakeer Pathan Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Social Welfare Dept and Ors.