Remanded

Shri Ganpat Vithal Jagtap v. the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary, Home (State Excise) and Ors.

Bombay HC30 Jan 2015WP/11704/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed by a licence holder seeking transfer was disposed of by remitting the underlying revision application for fresh hearing before a competent authority after the original hearing officer ceased to hold office.

What did the court decide?

Directed re-hearing of the revision application within three months; all contentions on merits kept open.

Shri Ganpat Vithal Jagtap Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2015)

wp11704

ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION
 WRIT PETITION NO.11704 OF 2014

¶5

Ganpat Vithal Jagtap
vs.
The State of Maharashtra
and others

¶6

...Petitioner

¶7

...Respondents

¶8

Mr.D.B.Savant for the petitioner
Mr.V.S.Gokhale, AGP for the respondent Nos.1 to 3

¶9

CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
 A.K.MENON, JJ.
 DATE : JANUARY 30, 2015

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned AGP for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
The petitioner made an application to the District
Collector seeking transfer of the CL-III licence.
The District Collector rejected the said application
by order dated 15th February 2014.

¶12

2Being aggrieved by the said order, the
petitioner preferred a revision application before
the State Government. The case made out in the
petition is that the revision application was heard
on 20th May 2014 by the then Cabinet Minister of the
State Excise Department. It is stated that however
no order was passed on the revision application.

¶13

3In view of the case made out in the petition,
the revision application will have to be re-heard as
the Hon'ble Minister who heard the revision

¶14

wp11704

¶15

¶16

application has ceased to be the Minister of the
State Excise Department.

¶17

4We accordingly dispose of the petition by
passing the following order:

¶18

(I) We direct the petitioner or his authorised representative to appear before the Revisional Authority on 27^th February 2015 at 3.00 p.m.;

¶19

(II) The petitioner shall produce an authenticated copy of this order on that date before the Revisional Authority;

¶20

(III) The Revisional Authority shall decide the revision application afresh as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of three months from 27^th February 2015;

¶21

(IV) All contentions on merits are kept open;

¶22

(V) Writ Petition is disposed of on above terms.

¶23

(A.K.MENON,J.)

Shri Ganpat Vithal Jagtap v. the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary, Home (State Excise) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Ganpat Vithal Jagtap v. the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary, Home (State Excise) 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

Gajendra Vitthaldas Khedekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and 9 Ors.

Narhari Sitaram Jirval Vs Shri. Bhanudas H. Palve and Ors.

Sindhu Sadashiv Arane @ Rekha Hiraman Shinde Vs the Government of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Sofan Fakir Thakur Vs the City and Industrial Development Corporation and Ors.

Shri. Dharmaraj D. Thakur Vs the City and Industrial Development Corporation and Ors.

Mukesh Shaligram Gondkar Vs Maharashtra State Co-Operative Tribal Development Corporation Ltd. and Ors.