Dismissed

Samir Kedarnath Agrawal, and Others v. the Commissioner, Akola Municipal Corporation, Akola, and Others

Bombay HC16 Dec 2015WP/5139/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment symbolically dismisses a writ petition challenging unauthorized construction by the Commissioner of Akola Municipal Corporation after the petitioner's counsel requested the Commissioner to act in accordance with law. The High Court mandated compliance with precedent, leading to the respondent commissioner filing an apology in court and withdrawing the objection filed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; notice against petitioners discharged; Commissioner given unconditional apology accepted by the court.

Samir Kedarnath Agrawal, and Others Vs the… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

1612wp5139.15

¶2

1/3

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.5139 OF 2015

¶5

(Samir Kedarnath Agrawal and others vs. The Commissioner, Akola Municipal Corporation and others)

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of

¶7

Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶8

Shri C.S. Kaptan, Senior Advocate with Shri A.A. Naik, Advocate for petitioners.

¶9

Shri F. Mirza, Advocate for respondent nos.1 and 2. Shri B.M. Lonare, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent no.3.

¶10

CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.

¶11

DATED : DECEMBER 16, 2015

¶12

We were required to summon

¶13

Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Akola since when the matter was listed on 9/12/2015, a statement

¶14

was made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Municipal Commissioner that he had spoken to Municipal Commissioner and the Municipal Commissioner sought a week's time to state whether he would proceed in accordance with law laid down in the case of Sopan Maruti Thopte

¶15

1612wp5139.15

¶16

and another vs. Pune Municipal Corporation and

¶17

another (1996(1) Mh.L.J. 963) and Hari Hotumal

¶18

Tanwani vs. Commissioner, Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation and others (2005 (3) Bom. C.R. 921). We were amazed with the statement made at the Bar that even for deciding whether the Authority would act in accordance with law, it required a week's time to think over.

¶19

Every Authority is bound to comply with the law as laid down by this Court. A simple statement on behalf of Municipal Commissioner that he would act in accordance with law would have ended the matter. We had also made it clear that we were restricting the issue for the present only to the unauthorized construction and not regarding possession of the premises in question.

¶20

Be that as it may, Shri Ajay Pralhad Lahane, presently working as Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Akola is present in the Court and has also filed an affidavit-in-reply. He has tendered his unconditional apology. He has stated that he has also issued order on 14/12/2015 to the

¶21

1612wp5139.15

¶22

3/3

¶23

Designated Officer, i.e. Zonal Officer (West Zone) of Akola Municipal Corporation to initiate appropriate proceedings forthwith in accordance with law in regard to unauthorized construction. He has also categorically stated that he shall proceed in accordance with law and in the light of law laid down in the case of Sopan Maruti Thopte and another vs. Pune Municipal Corporation and another (1996(1) Mh.L.J. 963) and Hari Hotumal

¶24

Tanwani vs. Commissioner, Ulhasnagar Municipal Corporation and others (2005 (3) Bom. C.R. 921).

¶25

In that view of the matter, we accept the unconditional apology tendered by Municipal Commissioner and discharge the notice issued to him.

¶26

Since Municipal Commissioner has made a statement that he will act in accordance with law, nothing survives in the petition. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶27

JUDGE JUDGE

¶28

khj

Samir Kedarnath Agrawal, and Others v. the Commissioner, Akola Municipal Corporation, Akola, and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samir Kedarnath Agrawal, and Others v. the Commissioner, Akola Municipal Corporation, Akola, 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

Shyamsunder Abaji Parate Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary Ministry of Health, Mumbai and 4 Others

Dyaneshwar S/O Gulabrao Sarkate and Another Vs State of Maharshtra, through Its Secretary, Dept. of Revenue, Mumbai and 5 Others

Prashant S/O Narayanrao Kimmatkar Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Tourisum, Mumbai and 2 Others

Manisha Aniruddha Mahatme and Others Vs Mr. Nandkumar, Secretary, School Education and Sports Dept., Mumbai and Others

Suresh Raghoba Bhowate and Others Vs Mr. Nandkumar, Secretary School Education and Sports Deptt., Mumbai and 3 Others

Dilip Vinayakrao Kalamkar and Others Vs Mr. Nandkumar, Secretary School Education and Sports Deptt., Mumbai and 3 Others