Disposed

Vikramsingh Routella., v. South Goa Planning and Development Authority (Sgpda) Thr. Its Member Secretary and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC1 Sept 2021WP/251/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-line order directing respondents to dispose of pending complaints against a third respondent on merits within three months, ensuring natural justice if adverse action is proposed.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to dispose complaints on merits within 3 months and comply with natural justice principles.

What the court decided

Vikramsingh Routella., Vs South Goa… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

17-WP-251-2020.DOC

¶2

Maria S.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NO.251 OF 2020

¶4

Vikramsingh Routella . .Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

South Goa Planning And Development Authority (SGPDA) thr. its Member Secretary And 2 Ors.

¶7

..Respondents

¶8

Mr. Prasheen Lotlikar, Advocate for the Petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Menino Pereira, Advocate for the Respondents No. 1 and 2.

¶10

CORAM: M. S. SONAK & SMT. M. S.JAWALKAR, JJ. Date: 1^st September, 2021

¶11

P.C.

¶12

1. Till date, no steps are taken to serve the unserved respondents. Be that as it may, the only relief prayed for in this petition is that the petitioner's complaints to respondents No.1 and 2 about some illegalities allegedly committed by respondent No.3 are not disposed of.

¶13

2. Accordingly, without accepting any of the allegations in the petition or without going into the merits of the matter, we only direct the respondents No.1 and 2 to dispose of such complaints on their own merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously

¶14

Page 1 of 2 1st September 2021

¶15

17-WP-251-2020.DOC

¶16

as possible and, in any case, within 3 months from the date of
service of authenticated copy of this order.

¶17

3. If any adverse action is proposed to be taken, then, the Authorities will have to comply with principles of natural justice.

¶18

4. With the aforesaid directions, this petition is disposed of.

¶19

5. All concerned to act based on the authenticated copy of this order.

¶20

6. Mr. Lotlikar, learned Counsel for the petitioner states that a copy of this order will be positively served upon respondent No.3 and the compliance report will be filed in this Court within one week from today.

¶21

SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR, J. M. S. SONAK, J.

¶22

Page 2 of 2 1st September 2021

Vikramsingh Routella., v. South Goa Planning and Development Authority (Sgpda) Thr. Its Member Secretary and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Vikramsingh Routella., v. South Goa Planning and Development Authority (Sgpda) Thr. Its Member Secretary and 2 Ors.

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

P.N. Writer and Co. Pvt. Ltd., through Its Sr. Manager-Legal Neville Mukadam. Vs Shripad Vassudev Lad (Since Deceased) Represented by Legal Heirs and 2 Ors.

Andrew D'Cunha Vs the Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Other Backward Class Certificate Govt. of Goa and 5 Ors.

Ferdinando Fernandes., Vs Pramod Faldessai and 10 Ors.

Rohidas B. Sakhalkar Vs Village Panchayat of Cortalim, Represented by Its Secretary and 3 Ors.

Damodar Higher Secondary School, Rep. by Its Man., Arvind Kulkarni and Anr., Vs State of Goa, Thr. the Chief Secretary and 2 Ors.

Akshata R. Korgaonkar Vs State of Goa, Thr. Its Chief Secretary and 3 Ors.