Disposed

Swastik Production Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and 2 Others

Bombay HC10 Jul 2018WP/1660/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Bombay disposed of a writ petition regarding illegal work. The court granted the petitioner an opportunity to apply for regularization of work via an Architect within one month, suspending action on a notice pending this process.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to apply for regularization within one month; notice suspended pending response to regularization application.

Swastik Production Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

SKN 1/2 1660.17-wp.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 1660 OF 2017

¶4

Swastik Production Pvt.Ltd. … Petitioner. V/s. State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents.

¶5

Mr.Akshay Kapadia i/b. Mr.Shekhar Jagtap for the petitioner. Ms.Jyoti Chavan, AGP for respondent No.1. Ms.Pallavi Thakar for the respondent Nos.2 and 3- MMC.

¶6

CORAM : A.S.OKA AND RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ. DATE : 10th July 2018.

¶7

P.C.:

¶8

Not on board. Taken up on board.

¶9

Digitally signed by Sanjay Sanjay KashinathNanoskar Kashinath Date: Nanoskar 2018.07.17 12:55:43 +0530

¶10

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instruction, states that the petitioner will submit a proposal for regularization of the work subject matter of the notice dated 24^th September 2016 within a period of one month from today. We accept the said statement. Considering the nature of illegal work mentioned in the notice dated 24^th September 2016, an opportunity deserves to be granted to the petitioner to make one more application for regularization as the earlier application was rejected on technical grounds.

¶11

Accordingly, we dispose of the petition by passing the following order:

¶12

SKN

¶13

2/2 1660.17-wp.doc

¶14

(i) It will be open for the petitioner to make an application for regularization in a prescribed form and by a prescribed mode through an Architect to the second respondent within a period of one month from today. If such an application is made, the second respondent shall pass appropriate order on the said application within a period of sixty days from the date on which the application is filed;

¶15

(ii) The order passed on the said application shall be communicated to the petitioner's Architect. Till the date of communication of the order to the petitioner's Architect, the notice dated 24^th September 2016 shall not be acted upon;

¶16

(iii) If the application for regularization is rejected, the said notice shall not be acted upon for a period of one month from the date on which intimation of rejection of the regularization application is served to the petitioner's Architect;

¶17

(iv) On failure of the petitioner to apply for regularization within the the stipulated period of one month from today, it will be open for the Municipal Corporation to take action on the basis of the notice dated 24^th September 2016;

¶18

(v) We make it clear that we have made no adjudication on the merits of the regularization application proposed to be made;

¶19

(vi) Writ petition is disposed of on the above terms.

¶20

(RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J.)

¶21

(A.S.OKA, J.)

Swastik Production Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swastik Production Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Pradeep Motwani Vs Mumbai Municipal Corporation and 2 Ors.

Prithvi Punjab Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Building No. 05 Vs Union of India and 2 Ors.

Prithvi Punjab Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Vs Union of India and 2 Others

Prathamesh Residency (C and D) Co-Op.Hsg.Soc.Ltd. Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

New Pushtikar Co-Operative Housing Soc. Ltd. and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 6 Ors.

Vijay Mahadev Mirajkar and Ors. Vs Shrirang Tanga @ Hanumant Bhalerao