Dismissed

Mr.Ashok S/O.Bansidhar Agarwal v. the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Jan 2016PIL/109/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The PIL was disposed of as none appeared for the petitioner despite notices. The court found the Municipal Corporation had taken adequate steps following notices issued and called for joint inspection, rendering the petition unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of as there are no reasons to entertain it given the steps taken by the Municipal Corporation.

Mr.Ashok S/O.Bansidhar Agarwal Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

pil-109.13

¶2

¶3

ash

¶4

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.109 OF 2013

¶6

Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders.

¶7

None for the Petitioner. Shri Rajiv Mane, AGP for the Respondent No.1. Ms. Trupti Puranik for the Respondent No.2.

¶8

CORAM : A.S. OKA & C.V. BHADANG, JJ DATED : 25TH JANUARY 2016

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

. None appeared for the Petitioner on the last date. Even today, none appears for the Petitioner. The learned counsel appearing for the Mumbai Municipal Corporation has produced for perusal of the Court a letter dated 21^st January 2016 by which on the second occasion, the Assistant Engineer (B&F) P/North Ward and Designated Officer-II has called upon the Petitioner to remain present for joint inspection.

¶11

pil-109.13

¶12

¶13

ash

¶14

We are, therefore, satisfied that the Mumbai Municipal Corporation has taken adequate steps on the basis of the notice dated 26^th September 2013 issued by the Advocate for the Petitioner. Hence, there is no reason to entertain this PIL and the same is disposed of.

¶15

(C.V. BHADANG, J) (A.S.OKA, J)

Mr.Ashok S/O.Bansidhar Agarwal v. the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Ashok S/O.Bansidhar Agarwal v. the State of Maharshtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Asmita Anand Meshram Vs Union of India and Ors.

Amit Maru Vs the State of Maharashtra and 10 Ors.

Samarth (Ngo) Vs Slum Rehabilitation Authority and Anr.

Velentine APARTMENT-1 Co-Op Housing Society Ltd. and Anr. Vs the Maharashtra Pollution Contral Board and and Anr.

Shri. Balasaheb Baburao Jambhulkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri Vinod S/O Somaji Patel and 4 Others Vs Nagpur Improvement Trust, through Its Chairman 4 Others

Vinod Ghosalkar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Vinod Ghosalkar and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Mohammed Khalid Shaikh and 14 Ors. Vs State of Maharshtra and 6 Ors.

Shree Ram Urban Infrastructure Limited Vs the Sate of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mr. Siddharam Shivappa Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Dept. of Education (Secondary and Higher S) and Ors.

Shri. Siddeshwar Bhanudas Hembade Vs State of Maharashtra, through the Chief Secretary, Revenue Dept and Ors.

Shri. Prakash Ramchandra Naiknavare Vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Vilas Govind Chopdekar and 12 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 6 Ors.