Remanded

Ismail Musabhai Bilakhiya v. the General Manager and Anr.

Bombay HC8 Dec 2016WP/561/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two writ petitions challenging delays in granting electricity connections, the Court held that a specific stay order dated 11 September 2014 does not bar the Respondent from disposing of pending applications. The Respondent was directed to decide the applications within one month without rejecting them based on that order.

What did the court decide?

Direct the first Respondent to decide pending applications for electricity connection within one month and not reject them based on the order dated 11.09.2014.

Ismail Musabhai Bilakhiya Vs the General Manager and… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2016)

wp-561n825.16

sng

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.561 OF 2016 ALONG WITH

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.825 OF 2016

¶6

WP NO.561 OF 2016

¶7

Ismail Musabhai Bilakhiya. Vs The General Manager and Another. --	.. ..	Petitioner Respondents
WP NO.825 OF 2016
Shabbir Taiyabali Paperwala. Vs	..	Petitioner
The General Manager and Another. –	..	Respondents

¶8

Shri K.P. Reshma Ravi i/b K.P. Ravi for the Petitioner in both the matters. Ms. Kavita Anchan i/b M.V.Kini & Co for the Respondents in both the matters.

¶9

CORAM : A.S. OKA & SMT.ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ DATED : 8TH DECEMBER 2016

¶10

P.C.

¶11

Rule. The Advocate on record for the Respondents waives service. Forthwith taken up for final disposal.

¶12

The Petitioners in both these Petitions have made

¶13

Applications to the first Respondent for grant of electricity connection to the premises more particularly described in the Petitions. The

wp-561n825.16

sng

learned counsel appearing for the Respondents on instructions states that the Applications made by the Petitioners for grant of electricity connection are not yet decided and the same have been kept pending on the ground that the Mumbai Municipal Corporation has invited attention of the Respondents to the order dated 11th September 2014 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Civil Application No.3802 of 2012 in First Appeal No.1599 of 2013.

¶18

On plain reading of the said order, we are of the view that the same does not come in the way of the first Respondent considering the Applications made by the Petitioners for grant of electricity connection. Accordingly, we dispose of the Petitions by passing the following order.

¶19

ORDER :

¶20

(a) We direct the first Respondent to decide the pending Applications of the Petitioners for grant of electricity connection in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of one month from the date on which the order is uploaded;

wp-561n825.16

sng

(b) We make it clear that the Applications shall not be rejected on the basis of the order dated 11th September 2014;

¶25

¶26

(SMT.ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J) ( A.S. OKA, J )

Ismail Musabhai Bilakhiya v. the General Manager and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ismail Musabhai Bilakhiya v. the General Manager and Anr.

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

Upl Limited Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Sarfaraz Arzu and 2 Ors. Vs Devendra Fadnavis and 3 Ors.

Adil D Karkaria Vs the Mumbai Repairs and Reconstruction Board and 4 Ors.

Mrs. Pradnya Prakash Deo Vs Mr. Chintamani Vasant Joshi

Vidyarthi Vikas Mitra Mandal, Thru. President Shri Rajendra Bhosale and Anr. Vs Choudhary Deepmala Ramesh and Ors.

Smt. Twinkle Sandeep Shah Vs Shri. Sandeep Ramesh Shah