Dismissed

M/S Lokmanya Enterprises through Partner v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC20 Feb 2014WP/1787/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay held that a petitioner must first establish a right qua a private party before seeking relief against a statutory authority. The court found the writ petition not maintainable on facts, leaving the remedy of a civil suit open, and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Disposed of the writ petition holding it not maintainable on facts.

M/S Lokmanya Enterprises through… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

{1}

¶2

1787.11 wp.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1787 OF 2011

¶5

M/s. Lokmanya Enterprises.

¶6

Petitioner/s

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Maharashtra and others.

¶9

Respondent/s

¶10

Mr. A.G. Godhamgaonkar, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. S.G. Karlekar, AGP for the Respondent No.1
Mr. S.S. Dande, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Mr. R.P. Bhumkar, Advocate for respondent No.3.

¶11

CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI &
 RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, JJ.
 DATE : 20TH FEBRUARY, 2014.

¶12

PER COURT:

¶13

1]After hearing Mr. Godhamgaonkar, and
perusing with his assistance the writ petition and all
annexures thereto, we are of the opinion that the
petitioner will have to first establish a right qua a
private party and then alone, it can seek any relief
against the statutory authority.

¶14

2]Once the statutory authority recognizes some
arrangement between private parties, then only when
that arrangement is quashed and by a court of
competent jurisdiction, after issuing a declaration in

¶15

{2} 1787.11 wp.odt

¶16

that behalf in favour of the present petitioner, that
the petitioner can seek any direction against the
statutory authority.

¶17

3]Presently, on the disputed questions of
fact, we do not think that the writ petition, at the
instance of the petitioner, is maintainable. Leaving
open all contentions, including a remedy of filing a
suit in a competent civil court, we dispose of the
writ petition.

¶18

[RAVINDRA V. GHUGE][S.C. DHARMADHIKARI]
 JUDGEJUDGE.

¶19

grt/-

M/S Lokmanya Enterprises through Partner v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Lokmanya Enterprises through Partner 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

Ashifkhan Daulatkhan Pathan Vs Vijay Namdeo Lahane and Ors.

Shaikh Aslam Shaikh Ramzan and Anr. Vs Vijay Namdeo Lahane and Ors.

The State of Mah and Ors. Vs Ansuyabai Baburao Patil and Ors.

Shivswayambhu Realtors Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Vishnupant Ambadas Mane Vs the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Deelip Madhavrao Kadam Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.