Quashed

Tushar Ashok Waghere and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC29 Oct 2014WP/610/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Judicature at Bombay quashed a communication dated 15th June 2012 issued by the Fourth Respondent, directing respondents to reconsider the petitioners' case for TDR grant based on prior Writ Petition No.6547 of 2010, while keeping merit contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Impugned communication dated 15th June 2012 quashed. Direction to reconsider case for TDR grant within six weeks.

Tushar Ashok Waghere and Ors. Vs the… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2014)

WP610-29.10

1/2

PNP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.610 OF 2013

¶7

Tushar Ashok Waghere and another ...Petitioners. versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents.

¶8

Mr. Prasad B. Kulkarni for the Petitioners. Mr. V.S. Gokhale, AGP for Respondent No.1. Mr. Deepak R. More for Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4.

CORAM : A.S. OKA &

A.S. GADKARI, JJ.

29^th October 2014.

P.C. :

Heard learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners, learned counsel appearing for the Second, Third and Fourth Respondents and the learnged AGP for the First Respondent.

¶14

For the reasons separately assigned today while disposing of Writ Petition No. 6547 of 2010, the communication dated 15^th June 2012 (Exhibit E to the Petition) issued by the Fourth Respondent deserves to be quashed and set aside. The Second and Fourth Respondents will have to consider the case of the Petitioners for grant of TDR in terms of the directions issued by this Court in Writ Petition No.6547 of 2010. Therefore, it is not necessary at this stage to consider prayer clause (a) on merits.

WP610-29.10

2/2

PNP

3, Accordingly we dispose of the Petition by passing the following order:

¶19

i) The impugned communication dated 15^th June 2012 (Exhibit 'E' to the Petition) issued by the Fourth Respondent is hereby quashed and set aside;

¶20

ii) We direct the Second to Fourth Respondents to reconsider the case of the Petitioners for grant of TDR in the light of the directions issued by this Court today in Writ Petition No.6547 of 2010. An appropriate order shall be passed by the Second to Fourth Respondents within a period of six weeks from today;

¶21

iii) In the event the Petitioners are aggrieved by the order which may be passed by the aforesaid Respondent, it will be open for them to file a fresh petition for challenging the said order as well as for claiming relief in terms of prayer clause (a) of this Petition;

¶22

iv) All contentions on merits are kept open;

¶23

v) Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶24

(A.S. Oka, J.)

¶25

(A.S. Gadkari, J.)

Tushar Ashok Waghere and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tushar Ashok Waghere and Ors. 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Vijay Gunga Patil Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Dinanath Rajaram Ballal Vs State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Balasaheb Sitaram Auti Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Pankaj Stone Crushers, Sangola, through Prop. Shri. Satish Bhagwan Suryawanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Supreme Agencies, through Sole Prop. Subhash Ramchandra Sonawane and Ors. Vs the Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas and Ors.

M/S. Vardhan Construction Company, through Partner, Shri. Amit Vardhan Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept and Ors.