Disposed

Gangakhed Sugar and Energy Ltd, Parbhani v. the Government of India, New Delhi and Others

Bombay HC9 Feb 2015WP/1206/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench dismissed the writ petition after noting that delay condonation was unnecessary based on a similar petition. However, without deciding merits, it disposed of the matter by directing the Secretary, Govt of India, to expedite consideration of the petitioner's representation.

What did the court decide?

Directions to Secretary, Govt of India to consider petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within eight weeks.

Gangakhed Sugar and Energy Ltd, Parbhani Vs the… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

wp 1206.15.odt

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1206 OF 2015

¶5

Gangakhed Sugar & Energy Limited

¶6

Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Government of India and others

¶9

Respondents

¶10

Mr.V.D.Hon, Sr. Advocate h/f Mr.M.V.Nagargoje advocate for the petitioner Mr.S.S.Tope, GP for Respondent Nos.2 & 3 Mr. S.B.Deshpande, A.S.G for respondent No.1

¶11

CORAM : R.M. BORDE & P.R. BORA, JJ Dated : 9^th February, 2015.

¶12

PER COURT :-

¶13

1 Earlier Writ Petition No.11122 of 2014 on similar grievance was presented by one Manjra Shetkari Sahkari Sakhar Karkhana Limited. The Division Bench of this Court disposed of the petition with following observations.

¶14

" (3) It is not in dispute that, the petitioner has not made any representation and crushing season has already started. Only explanation given for delayed approach is in paragraph No.14 of the writ petition, which reads as under:-

¶15

" Although impugned order is dt.14/2/2014, thereafter the matter was considered by the Committee of the Ministries on 31/7/2014 based on which Hon'ble Chief Minister issued directions that FRP fixed by virtue of impugned order is required to be paid. Thereafter in order to collect date of file instant petition certain time was consumed.

¶16

{2}

¶17

wp 1206.15.odt

¶18

Thus, basically there is no delay to file instant petition, however, delay if any, needs to be condoned in the interest of justice If delay is not condoned, then the petitioner would be put to inconvenience and hardship and may loose its right to challenge impugned order. "

¶19

(4) We find the reason insufficient. We are not inclined to take cognizance of such dispute for the first time in writ jurisdiction. Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. "

¶20

2 The petitioner contends that he has already made representation to the secretary, Govt. of India on 22.12.2014 and no cognizance thereof is taken.

¶21

3 Without entering into the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition with directions to Secretary, Govt of India to consider the representation and pass appropriate orders, as deemed necessary, on consideration of merits of such contentions, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of eight weeks from today.

¶22

4 With the direction as above, writ petition is disposed of.

¶23

vbd

Gangakhed Sugar and Energy Ltd, Parbhani v. the Government of India, New Delhi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gangakhed Sugar and Energy Ltd, Parbhani v. the Government of India, New Delhi and Others

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

The State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary (Co Operation), Co. Operation, Mumbai Vs Vijendra Vishwanathrao Chavan and Others

Chandar Bapu Kotwad Died through L.Rs. Jijabai Chandar Kotwad and Others Vs the M.I.D.C. through Regional Officer Latur and Others

Sanjay Shivaji Jaripatake and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Managing Committee, Alam Nawaz Jung Education Society, Jalna Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sakharbai Haribhau Shelke, Lrs Sanjivani Dashrath Mhabre and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vitthal Shrirang Kothule and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others