Disposed

Shri. Gautam Vishnu Kamble, through Power of Attorney, Shri. Babu Hira Patel v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC24 Jun 2014WP/4491/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition was disposed of through an order directing the Collector at Pune to appear and decide a pending modification application within three months, while keeping all substantive contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to appear before District Collector; direction for Collector to decide pending application within three months.

Shri. Gautam Vishnu Kamble, through Power of Attorney, Shri. Babu Hira Patel Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Bombay HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

DeshmanePPD

44.WP.4491-14.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.4491 OF 2014

¶6

Shri Gautam Vishnu Kamble Versus

¶7

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶8

..Petitioner

¶9

..Respondents

¶10

Mr. J.S. Yadav i/b. Vilas Babanrao Tapkir, for the Petitioner. Mr. A.D. Kango, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶11

CORAM : A.S. OKA, AND A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.

¶12

DATE : 24^th JUNE, 2014

¶13

P.C.

¶14

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGP for the respondents.

¶15

An application made by the petitioner for modification of the order dated 17^th June, 2008 passed by the Collector is stated to be pending before the Collector at Pune. A copy of the said application dated 29^th March, 2014 is at Exhibit-H to the Petition. The learned AGP has no instructions as regards the status of the said application. Hence, we dispose of this Petition by the following order :

¶16

(i) We direct the petitioner or his constituted attorney to appear before the District Collector at Pune on 8^th July,

1 / 2

PPD

44.WP.4491-14.doc

2014 at 11:00 a.m.. The petitioner or his constituted attorney shall produce an authenticated copy of this order before the District Collector at Pune;

¶22

(ii) If the application dated 29^th March, 2014 is already decided, a copy of the order passed on the said application be provided to the petitioner;

¶23

(iii) If the application is not yet decided, the Collector shall make endeavour to decide the said application in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date fixed for appearance of the petitioner;

¶24

(iv) We make it clear that we have not made any adjudication on the entitlement of the petitioner to seek modification of the order dated 17^th June, 2008 and all the contentions of the parties are kept open;

¶25

(v) The Petition is disposed of on above terms.

¶26

(A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.) (A. S. OKA, J.)

¶27

2 / 2

Shri. Gautam Vishnu Kamble, through Power of Attorney, Shri. Babu Hira Patel v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Gautam Vishnu Kamble, through Power of Attorney, Shri. Babu Hira Patel v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suvir Indru Mirchandani Vs District Collector, Satara and Ors.

Abutalab Samsher Golandaj and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra, through Dept of Urban Development and Ors.

Suvir Indru Mirchandani Vs District Collector, Satara and Ors.

Shri. Ramesh Revansiddha Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept and Ors.

Shri. Ramesh Revansiddha Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept and Ors.

Mr. Prakash Rajaram Taware Vs the Bhiwandi Nijampur City Municipal Corporation, Islampura and Anr.