Disposed

Ghanshyam Leeladhar Karia and Anr. v. the Municipal Corporation of the City of Nashik, through Commissioner and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Sept 2018WP/1131/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Municipal Corporation of Nashik to consider pending representations filed by petitioners within two weeks and pass a reasoned order within six weeks, keeping all merits open. The pending petition seeking possession of vacant land was disposed of without deciding on merits.

What did the court decide?

Direction to file comprehensive representation and for the Commissioner to pass a reasoned order within six weeks.

Ghanshyam Leeladhar Karia and Anr. Vs the… — Municipal and Town Planning | Bombay HC (2018)

10-wp-1131-14.doc

pdp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 1131 OF 2014

¶6

Ghanshyam Leeladhar Karia & Anr.

¶7

.. Petitioners

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Municipal Corporation of the City of Nashik and ors.

¶10

.. Respondents

¶11

Mr. P. J. Thorat for petitioners. Mr. M. L. Patil for respondent nos.1 and 2. Mr. P. P. Kakade, AGP for respondent no.3 – State.

¶12

CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL, ACTING CJ & R. G. KETKAR, J.

¶13

SEPTEMBER 06, 2018.

¶14

P.C.

¶15

This petition is pending since last four years. The petitioners

¶16

seek direction to respondent nos.1 and 2 to hand over vacant possession of

¶17

eastern side portion admeasuring 779.20 sq.mtrs. of land from Final Plot

¶18

No. 47 of Town Planning Scheme, Nashik No.II (Final), situate at Nashik.

¶19

The remaining portion from Final Plot No. 47 has been handed over to the

¶20

petitioners but the area from adjoining plot admeasuring 779.20 sq.mtrs.

¶21

remained to be handed over. Inspite of the order passed by this court

¶22

¶23

10-wp-1131-14.doc

¶24

(Coram: A. S. Oka & A.A. Sayed, JJ,) on 3/3/2014, the Corporation has not filed any reply till date.

¶25

The petitioners claim that they have filed representations dated 11/11/2011 and 14/12/2012 (Exhs. K & L to the petition) addressed to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Nashik, which have not yet been decided neither petitioners have intimated any decision so far on the said representations.

¶26

We observe that the petitioners are entitled to file comprehensive representation on the subject issue within two weeks from today addressed to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Nashik. We direct the Commissioner to hear the petitioners and pass a brief reasoned order on the representation made by the petitioners. This exercise be completed within six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation from the petitioners. All issues on merits are kept open.

¶27

With the aforesaid observations, petition is disposed of.

¶28

Pravin Dasharath Pandit

¶29

R. G. KETKAR, J. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE

¶30

Digitally signed by Pravin Dasharath Pandit Date: 2018.09.10 12:30:10 +0530

Ghanshyam Leeladhar Karia and Anr. v. the Municipal Corporation of the City of Nashik, through Commissioner and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ghanshyam Leeladhar Karia and Anr. v. the Municipal Corporation of the City of Nashik, through Commissioner and 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

M/S. Nandikeshwar Hotels Pvt. Ltd. through Arun Hegde Vs the State of Maharashtra through Ministry of Urban Development and Ors.

Mr.Hiten Hasmukh Shah Vs Dr.Abhay Gangadhar Pagdhare

Mr. Rahul Radheshyam Bhomavat Vs Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Reveneue and Ors.

Vikrant Chandrahas Tawde Vs Union of India, through Ministry of Railways and Ors.

The Chief Officer Satara Nagar Parishad Vs Shri. Sushant Subhash More and Ors.

The Chief Officer Satara Nagar Parishad Vs Shri. Sushant Subhash More and Ors.