Allowed

Chotelal Laxman Killedar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC21 Jan 2014WP/564/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition holding that the quashing of a prior appeal violated the principles of natural justice as the petitioner was not given a hearing. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The respondent No. 2 shall decide the Appeal afresh after hearing the petitioner.

Chotelal Laxman Killedar Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

1 W.P. 564.2014

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 564 OF 2014

¶5

Chotelal Laxman Killedar V/s The State of Mah. & Ors.

¶6

Office Notes,Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram,appearances, ................................ Court's orders or CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. directions and Registrar's orders DATE : 21/01/2014

¶7

Mr. Y.S.Choudhari, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. V.P.Kadam, A.G.P. for the State.

¶8

COURT'S ORDER :

¶9

' Rule '. 2. Learned A.G.P. waives notice of Rule.

¶10

Heard finally.

¶11

The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent No. 2

¶12

2 W.P. 564.2014

¶13

has decided the Appeal filed by the petitioner without hearing the petitioner.

¶14

Mr. Choudhari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the Appeal was filed, the petitioner was not given any notice of hearing and the impugned order is passed without hearing the parties.

¶15

The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the authority has considered the report, relevant aspect of the matter and has discussed in detail. The learned counsel submits that the authority has rightly passed the order.

¶16

The fundamental and cardinal principles of natural justice requires that before any adverse order is passed, the party is required to be heard. From the order it also does not transpire that the petitioner was given any opportunity of hearing.

¶17

The impugned order is quashed and set aside.

¶18

The parties are relegated before the respondent No. 2.

¶19

Respondent No. 2 shall decide the Appeal afresh after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner shall appear before respondent No. 2 on 10/02/2014. Respondent No. 2 shall decide

¶20

3 W.P. 564.2014

¶21

the said Appeal expeditiously after hearing all concerned on its own merits.

¶22

It is made clear that I have not considered the merits of the matter. I have considered the Writ Petition on the ground that the principles of natural justice are not followed.

¶23

[ S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. ]

¶24

KNP/W.P. 564.2014

Chotelal Laxman Killedar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chotelal Laxman Killedar v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

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

Mirabai Dharmendra Gaikwad Vs Anna Suka Bhoi and Others

Sachin Sharadchandra Chingare Vs Chairman Indira Gandhi Memorail Foun. Dhuel and Ors.

Madhukar Gopal Mathekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Narayan Tatya Gore, L.Rs. Ramdas and Others Vs Vishwambhar Sakharam Thigale and Others

Subhash Sitaram Haran and Others Vs Pandurang Sitaram Haram

Sagar Sureshchandra Gandhi Vs Sadguru Krupa Sahakari Gruh Nirman Society Ltd. and Others