Disposed

Shreedharan R. T. v. Municipal Corp. of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC15 Dec 2015WP/2396/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged cancellation of his hotel license. When the respondent undertook to decide his pending application, the court held the petition no longer survived. The writ was disposed of but interim protection was continued.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition stands disposed of. Respondent directed to decide petitioner's application by 08/01/2016. Interim protection continued till 15/01/2016.

Shreedharan R. T. Vs Municipal Corp. of Greater Mumbai… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

66.2396.15-wp

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2396/2015

¶5

Office Notes, Office Court’s or Judge’s orders Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders

¶6

Mr. P. C. Kansara i/b. Kansara & Thanekar for the Petitioner

¶7

Mr. Anil Singh, Additional Solicitor General a/w. Ms. K. H. Mastakar for the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation

¶8

CORAM : K. K. TATED, J. DATE : DECEMBER 15, 2015

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

Heard. By this petition, the Petitioner is challenging the order dated 20/04/2015 passed by the Respondent Medical Officer Health, M/East Ward, Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation by which the Petitioner's license of Hotel Santosh (Tadka) and Tadka-2 stood cancelled.

¶11

The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that as per order dated 20/04/2015 he immediately applied to the Medical Officer and submitted all relevant documents with Application which is at page 79 Exhibit- G to the petition. The said Application is not decided by the Corporation till today.

Basavraj G Patil

1/2

66.2396.15-wp

The learned Additional Solicitor General, after taking instructions from Dr. Ingle, Medical Officer of Health – M/West Ward and Dr. Gaikwad, Medical Officer of Health – M/East Ward of the Respondent Municipal Corporation, who are present in court, makes a statement that they will decide the Application page 79 Exhibit- G to the petition, on or before 08/01/2016 and communicate the order to the Petitioner.

¶16

In view of the statement made by the learned Additional Solicitor General on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, nothing survives in the petition.

¶17

Hence, following order is passed:

¶18

a. The Respondent is directed to decide the Petitioner's Application, page 79 Exhibit- G to the petition on or before 08/01/2016 and communicate the order to the Petitioner.

¶19

b. Interim protection granted by this court on 07/05/2015 to continue till 15/01/2016.

¶20

c. Writ Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

¶21

JUDGE

¶22

Basavraj G Patil

¶23

2/2

Shreedharan R. T. v. Municipal Corp. of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shreedharan R. T. v. Municipal Corp. of Greater Mumbai and 3 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

Narendra Kumar Ram Achal Sharma and Anr. Vs Harish Ramkrishna Prabhu and Anr.

Atul Manikchand Katariya Vs the Municipal Corporation of the City of Pune

The State of Maharashtra through the Executive Engineer Raigad Vs M/S. Patwardhan Infrasturcture Pvt. Ltd.

Axis Bank Limited Vs Shreem Corporation Ltd.

Spedag East Africa Ltd. Vs Surendra Engineering Corporation Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Kisan Mouldings Limited Vs Nirjala Gunanand Mishra and 2 Ors.