Disposed

Bhausaheb Kisanrao Hatmode v. State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC15 Mar 2016WP/7978/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition concerning the release of compensation, the High Court directed the appropriate authority to conclude the inquiry within three months after giving parties an opportunity to be heard, and to disburse the amount forthwith if the inquiry favors the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 3 directed to issue notice to objectors and conclude the inquiry within three months of the parties' appearance; if decision favors petitioner, disburse amount forthwith.

Bhausaheb Kisanrao Hatmode Vs State of Maharashtra… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

7978.15wp

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

_____________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | ______________________________________________________ WRIT PETITION NO. 7978 OF 2015

¶6

BHAUSAHEB KISANRAO HATMODE

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶9

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Jayabhar Dattatraya R. AGP for Respondents/State : Mr.S.P. Sonpawale.

¶10

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & V.L. ACHLIYA, JJ. Dated: MARCH 15, 2016

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

2 In pursuance to the notice issued to the respondents, the respondents have filed affidavit-inreply. It is stated in the said affidavit that, if the petitioner and the objector / applicant appear before the authorities and cooperate in the inquiry, the respondents 2 and 3 will ensure that such inquiry is concluded within a period of two months.

¶13

3 In that view of the matter, we direct respondent No.3 to issue notice to the objectors and after giving an opportunity to the parties of being heard, to conclude such inquiry, as expeditiously as possible; however, within three months from the date of appearance of the

¶14

7978.15wp

¶15

¶16

parties before the said authority.

¶17

We make it clear that, in case the persons who have objected for releasing the amount in favour of the petitioner, fail to appear before the respondent No.3 upon service of the notice, the respondent no.3 will be at liberty to proceed with the matter and conclude the inquiry and take an appropriate decision. If the decision so taken is in favour of the petitioner, the respondent No.3 to disburse the amount of compensation to the petitioner, forthwith.

¶18

We have not expressed any opinion about the merits of the inquiry. It is for the respondent No.3 to inquire into the matter and take decision, in accordance with the record and relevant provisions. Petition stands disposed of on above terms.

¶19

Parties to act upon authenticated copy of this order.

¶20

(V.L. ACHLIYA, J) (S.S. SHINDE, J)

¶21

kadam/

Bhausaheb Kisanrao Hatmode v. State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhausaheb Kisanrao Hatmode v. State of Maharashtra and Others

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

Bharat Jagnnath Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Jeevan Vinayak Jahagirdar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Subhash Sahebrao Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Nasreen Rashid Shaikh and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bahujan Hitaya Bhojan Utpadak and Purawatha Magasvargiya Audyogik Sahakari Sanstha Ltd. Parbhani Vs State of Maharashtra and Another

Arun Shrinewasrao Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others