Disposed

Salim Shamim Shaikh v. the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and 4 Ors.

Bombay HC28 Jun 2016WP/1024/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay, in writ petition no.1024 of 2016, issued a direction to the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay to consider the petitioner's claim for transfer of a handcart licence from his deceased father's name within two months, disposing of the petition without expressing an opinion on its merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent Corporation to consider the petitioner's claim for transfer of handcart licence and take appropriate decision within two months.

Salim Shamim Shaikh Vs the Municipal Corporation of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

prod-904-wp-1024-2016

¶2

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

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.1024 OF 2016

¶4

Salim Shamim Khan ...Petitioner vs.

¶5

The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and Others ...Respondents

¶6

Mr. Indu Prakash Tripathi, for the Petitioner Mrs. Geeta Joglekar, for the Respondent-BMC.

¶7

CORAM : SHANTANU KEMKAR & MAKARAND KARNIK, JJ. DATE : JUNE 28, 2016

¶8

P.C.:

¶9

Not on board. Upon mentioning taken on board.

¶10

Leave to amend the cause title is granted. The amendment

¶11

is to be carried out forthwith.

¶12

The Petitioner claims that his father was holding a licence

¶13

of a handcart and after the death of his father in the year 2004, the Petitioner's mother had applied for transfer of the said licence in her

¶14

favour but the mother is not interested for the transfer of the said licence of the handcart in her favour. According to the Petitioner, he had also submitted the application in the year 2004 for transfer of the

¶15

1/2

¶16

Vishal Parekar

¶17

prod-904-wp-1024-2016

¶18

said handcart in his favour. He submits that thereafter the Respondents vide letter dated 30^th June, 2010 directed the Petitioner to submit the documents in support of his claim which the Petitioner had submitted in the year 2010 itself but till date no decision has been taken on his application by the Respondents.

¶19

Having considered the submissions made by the parties, we are inclined to dispose of this Petition by directing the competent authority of Respondent-Corporation to consider and take appropriate decision in regard to the Petitioner's claim for transfer of licence of handcart which was in the name of his father. Let the appropriate decision in accordance with law be taken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. With the aforesaid direction, the Petition stands disposed of.

¶20

Needless to say that we have not expressed our opinion in respect to the merits of the Petitioner's claim.

¶21

2/2

¶22

Vishal Parekar

Salim Shamim Shaikh v. the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and 4 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salim Shamim Shaikh v. the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and 4 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

Mr. Austin Jerome Rodricks Vs the Mumbai Municipal Corporation and 9 Ors.and Doleen Wd/o Abelon E.D'Mello and 2 Ors.(Pro.Res.)

Avinash Shankar Kelaskar and 5 Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Anil Vasant Devkar Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Anr.

The State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept. and Ors. Vs Shiv Kumar H. Sahu and Ors.

Mauli Bharat Udyog Nagar Welfare Association and 2 Ors. Vs Municipal Corp. of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

M/S Rajmaitri Corporation Vs the State of Maharashtra and 20 Ors.