The Bombay High Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the respondent officer to consider pending representations after providing a hearing opportunity to all parties.
The petition was disposed of by directing respondent no. 4 to consider representations after giving hearing opportunity to all parties within two months.
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.
hvn
1
13-wp-1087.2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1087 OF 2017
Sudha Ramchandra Hatkar and Ors.
… Petitioners
Versus
Mr. Jayesh K. Shah and Ors.
Mr. Altaf Khan i/by Anjali Awasthi for the petitioners.
Ms. Manisha Jagtap a/w Mr. Akshay Kapadia for respondent nos. 3 to 6.
Mr.Arshil Shah with Ms.Rima Paradkar i/by M/s. D.M. Legal Associates for respondent nos. 8 to 10.
CORAM : SHANTANU KEMKAR & G.S. KULKARNI, JJ. NOVEMBER 27, 2017
P.C.:
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
petitioner's representations at Exhibit “A” and Exhibit. “O” filed
before the respondent no. 3 to 7 are pending and in the
circumstances, as agreed by the learned counsel for the parties, we
deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition by directing respondent
no.4 to consider and take appropriate decision on the said
hvn
2
13-wp-1087.2017
representation after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as respondent nos. 1 and 2 and respondent nos. 8 to 10.
by a speaking order.
(G.S.KULKARNI, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)
Sudha Ramchandra Hatkar and Ors.
Mr. Jayesh K. Shah and Ors.
Shantanu Kemkar
G.S. Kulkarni
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
