Dismissed

Manohar Rajaram Dalavi and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC4 Jan 2018WP/4646/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay refused to entertain a writ petition for enforcement of a Government Resolution, directing petitioners to approach statutory authorities first before seeking reliefs from the court.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to approach statutory authorities and seek reliefs permissible in law; thereafter, return the matter for reconsideration.

Manohar Rajaram Dalavi and Anr. Vs the… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

9-WP.4646.2016.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 4646 OF 2016

¶4

Manohar Rajaram Dalavi } and Anr. } Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra } and Ors. } Respondents

¶5

Mr. Rakesh S. Patil for the petitioners.

¶6

Mr. B. V. Samant-AGP for State.

¶7

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, JJ. DATE :- JANUARY 4, 2018

¶8

P.C. :-

¶9

The petitioners are seeking enforcement of a Government Resolution dated 29^th September, 1987 and have relied upon a judgment and order dated 25^th July, 2014 passed by this court in Writ Petition No. 6419 of 2011. This petition is filed by the present petitioners stating that this set of petitioners was not party to the earlier petition. We have not seen any averment in the petition stating that these petitioners, who are seeking benefit of the earlier judgment and order of this court have approached any statutory authority requesting it to comply with the judgment and grant the benefits thereof to them. Para 16 of the writ petition is relied upon, but it is bereft of any particulars,

¶10

Page 1 of 2

¶11

J.V.Salunke,PA

¶12

9-WP.4646.2016.doc

¶13

which are required before this court is approached seeking a writ of mandamus. That writ of mandamus is issued to enforce a preexisting or pre-established legal right is clear. Further, a writ of mandamus is issued in favour of such parties and to enforce such public duties when the statutory authorities, though approached, have failed to render justice. Thus, the fact that the justice was demanded and it was denied ought to be mentioned with all particulars in that behalf.

¶14

We would not, therefore, entertain this petition, but allow the petitioners to approach the statutory authorities and seek such reliefs as are permissible in law. It is only thereafter we would consider any of the matters and based on the reliance on the earlier judgment of this court.

¶15

The writ petition is disposed of with liberty as above.

¶16

(SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶17

Page 2 of 2

¶18

J.V.Salunke,PA

Manohar Rajaram Dalavi and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manohar Rajaram Dalavi and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Viram Impex and 3 Ors. Vs Enreach Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Vs Walter Bau Ag (Il)

M/S. Viram Impex and 3 Ors. Vs M/S. Enreach Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

Bai Kabibai and Hansraj Morarji Charity Trust Vs Airports Authority of India

Maharashtra Kamgar Manch through Dilip Mohite Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kishor Sohoni Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.