Vishwanath Dattaram Pawar v. State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.
Case brief
What is this about?
IN THE HIGH COURT
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
wp600.14.688.14.725.14.doc
Pvr
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.600 OF 2014
Vishwanath Dattaram Pawar
.. Petitioner
vs
State of Maharashtra & ors .. Respondents
with
PIL NO.31 OF 2014
Mangesh Malondkar
.. Petitioner
vs
State of Maharashtra & ors
.. Respondents
with WRIT PETITION NO.688 OF 2014 Sanjay Shankar Kadam .. Petitioner vs Municipal Corpn of Gr.Bombay & ors .. Respondents
with
WRIT PETITION NO.725 OF 2014
Rekha John Nadar .. Petitioner vs State of Maharashtra & ors .. Respondents
Mr.Rakesh Kumar a/w Ms.Janaki Mishra Ms.Dipti Pednekar i/b Legal Vision for Petitioner Mr.Milind More Addl Govt.Pleader for Respondent nos.1 and 2
Dr.Birendra Saraf Sr.Counsel with Ms.Trupti Puranik for Respondents
wp600.14.688.14.725.14.doc
Pvr
CORAM : A.S.OKA & G.S. KULKARNI, JJ. DATED : 14 March, 2016
P.C.
that in view of the fact that The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014 (for short “the said Act”) has been brought into force on 1st May 2014 the Petitioners are not pressing the present Petitions. Now that the provisions of the said Act have come into force, all concerned are bound by the provisions of the said Act. Hence, all concerned parties are bound to provide protection to the Street Vendors which is available under the said Act. Accordingly, Petitions are disposed of as not pressed.
[G.S. KULKARNI, J]
[A.S.OKA,J.]
Vishwanath Dattaram Pawar
Mangesh Malondkar
Sanjay Shankar Kadam
Rekha John Nadar
State of Maharashtra
Municipal Corpn of Gr.Bombay
A.S.Oka
G.S.Kulkarni
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court