The court held that the petitioner's grievances regarding entertainment duty default and cable operations without a license had been redressed. The PIL was thus disposed of without costs.
The PIL was disposed of without any order for costs.
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.
1 PIL / 103 / 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 103 OF 2013
Milind Pralhad Bansode
... Petitioner
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra and others
... Respondents
Mr. R.V. Gore, Advocate for petitioner Mr. S.K. Tambe, AGP for respondent – State Mr. A.G. Talhar, Advocate for respondents no. 4 to 6 Mr. A.A. Khande, Advocate for respondent no. 7
CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ AND RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.
DATE : JANUARY 25, 2021
PC :
2 PIL / 103 / 2013
parties, appear to be correct. However, we also gather from such afdavits that in due course of time, the grievance of the petitioner has been entirely redressed. The Government has recovered in excess of Rs. 3,56,50,000/- of entertainment duty from the respondent no. 7 and also the respondent no. 7, which now has a new identity [i.e. M/s. Hathway MCN Pvt. Ltd.], has obtained the requisite licence on 12th December, 2013 from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India effective for 10 years subject to adherence and compliance of the terms and conditions therein.
[RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ]
arp/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's grievances regarding entertainment duty default and unlicensed cable operations have been redressed.
Milind Pralhad Bansode
The State of Maharashtra
M/s. Hathway MCN Pvt. Ltd.
Dipankar Datta
Ravindra V. Ghuge
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
