Dismissed

Damodhar Babarao Shinde and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC14 Nov 2019WP/4266/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the withdrawal of the writ petition filed regarding a challenge to a Municipal Council Resolution. It directed the Collector to decide the pending representation expeditiously within four weeks, considering the writ memo as additional material, and permitted withdrawal of portion of the litigation deposit.

What did the court decide?

Petition withdrawn with directions to Collector to decide representation within four weeks; Rs. 75,000 of deposit returned to petitioners, Rs. 25,000 to Child Care Center.

Damodhar Babarao Shinde and Others Vs the… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

{1} WP 4266 OF 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

920 WRIT PETITION NO.4266 OF 2019

¶4

DAMODHAR BABARAO SHINDE AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶5

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr.Sachin S. Deshmukh AGP for Respondents State : Mrs.M.A.Deshpande Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr.Swapnil S. Patnurkar Advocate for Respondent No.4 : Mr.N.T.Tribhuwan

¶6

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

¶7

DATE: 14^th November, 2019

¶8

PER COURT :-

¶9

After arguing the matter for some time, Mr.S.S.Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for withdrawal of the petition with certain directions to the Collector, Hingoli.

¶10

Mr.Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioners, by inviting our attention to the proceeding initiated before the Collector, Hingoli in the form of a challenge raised to a Resolution passed in the meeting of the Municipal Council, Kalamnuri held on 30.10.2018, submitted that though before the Collector, Hingoli, proceeding was submitted

¶11

{2} WP 4266 OF 2019

¶12

raising a challenge to the Resolution, in view of the provisions of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Township Act of 1965 and more particularly, in view of Section 308, no orders are passed by the Collector.

¶13

Mr.Deshmukh, learned counsel submitted that while deciding the representation/application dated 17.12.2018, the Collector may be directed to consider the grounds of the present petition also as the grounds were raised in brief in the representation/application and the petitioners may be permitted to submit grounds taken in the present petition before the Collector as an additional material and the Collector be directed to decide the representation/ application dated 17.12.2018 expeditiously.

¶14

This being now a very limited prayer, the petition is allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of with the directions to the Collector, Hingoli to decide the representation/ application dated 17.12.2018 considering the copy of the memo of the present Writ Petition as an additional document to the representation/application as expeditiously

¶15

{3} WP 4266 OF 2019

¶16

as possible and not later than four weeks from today. With these directions, the present petition is disposed of.

¶17

The Collector may provide an opportunity of hearing to all the parties and if the parties are willing to avail the opportunity of hearing, the petitioners and other contesting parties to appear before the Collector, Hingoli on 18.11.2019.

¶18

Mr.Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioners was fair enough to submit before this Court that the petitioners had deposited an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in this Court to show their bonafdes and the petitioners be permitted to withdraw part of the amount and part of the amount may be utilized for the bonafde object.

¶19

In view of the statement of Mr.Deshmukh, we permit the petitioners to withdraw an amount of Rs.75,000/- out of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited in this Court and rest of the amount i.e. Rs.25,000/- be transferred to the accounts of the Child Care Center initiated by the High Court Bar Association. Amount of interest, if any accrued, be also transferred to

¶20

{4} WP 4266 OF 2019

¶21

the accounts of Child Care Center.

¶22

Authenticated copy of the order be provided to the learned AGP to communicate the same to the Collector, Hingoli today itself.

¶23

( ANIL S. KILOR, J. ) ( PRASANNA B. VARALE, J. )

¶24

SPT

Damodhar Babarao Shinde and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Damodhar Babarao Shinde and Others v. the 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pravin Chandrakant Kolhe Vs Anil Panditrao Shewale

Tukaram Bhaguji Shinde and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shaikh Nizam Shaikh Jainuddin Vs the State of Maharashtr and Others

Arun Sakharam Wangujre Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vishal Sambhaji Kudale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Rahul Kailash Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another