Allowed

Gajanan S/O Kisanrao Bhadke v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mumbai and Others

Bombay HC21 Oct 2021WP/3576/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a writ petition seeking direction to the Collector Yavatmal to decide Municipal Council Case No.10/2019-20 in accordance with law within two months. The Bench allowed the petition after hearing counsel by consent and directed the Respondent No.2 to decide the case.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No.2 is directed to decide Municipal Council Case No.10/2019-20 in accordance with law within two months.

Gajanan S/O Kisanrao Bhadke Vs State of Maharashtra through… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

Judgment WP 3576.2020.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 3576 OF 2020

¶4

Gajanan s/o Kisanrao Bhadke,
Aged 52 yrs., Occ. Cultivation and Editor
‘Ek Ghav Amacha’, R/o 10, ‘Shri Sai
Shraddha’, Gajanan Nagar, Pimpalgaon
Road, Yavatmal, Tah. & Dist. Yavatmal

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. State of Maharashtra through
Secretary, Rural Development
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32

¶8

2. The Collector Yavatmal,
Collectorate Yavatmal, Tah. & Dist.
Yavatmal

¶9

3. The Chief Officer, Municipal Council,
Yavatmal, Tah. & Dist. Yavatmal.
.. Respondents

¶10

4. Sau.Sushama w/o Ajay Raut,
Aged 40 yrs., Occ. Councilor,
Municipal Council, Yavatmal,
5. Ajay s/o Sahebrao Raut,
Aged 45 years., Occ. Teacher,

¶11

Both the Respondents No.4 & 5 are
R/o Anushree Park, Plot No.27, Prabhag
No.4, Pimpalgaon, Tah. & Dist. Yavatmal.

¶12

Mr. Sudhir Malode, Advocate for petitioner.
Mr. D. P. Thakre, Addl.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Mr. Bhushan Dafle, Advocate for respondent Nos.4 & 5.

¶13

PAGE 1 OF 2

¶14

Judgment WP 3576.2020.odt

¶15

 CORAM:SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

¶16

DATED:21/10/2021

¶17

ORAL JUDGMENT(Per Sunil B. Shukre, J.)

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶19

Additional Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2, and
learned counsel for the respondent Nos.4 and 5.

¶20

(2) Rule . Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard

¶21

finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶22

(3) Respondent No.2 – Collector, Yavatmal, is directed

¶23

to decide the Municipal Council Case No.10/2019-20, Mouza-Yavatmal

¶24

in accordance with law, within a period of two months from the date
of the order.

¶25

(4) Rule Accordingly. No costs.

¶26

[ ANIL S. KILOR J. ] [ SUNIL B. SHUKRE J.]

¶27

KOLHE

¶28

PAGE 2 OF 2

Gajanan S/O Kisanrao Bhadke v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gajanan S/O Kisanrao Bhadke v. State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Rural Development Department, Mumbai and Others

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

M/S. Vinayak Stones, Amravati, Thr. Authorised Partner, Saket S/O. Ajay Mehta Vs State of Maharashtra, in the Ministry of Revenue and Forest, Thr. Its Secretary, Mumbai and Others

Ramkrushna S/O Pandurangji Katre Vs State of Maharashtra, Ministry of Revenue and Forest, Mumbai through Secretary and Others

Deepali Wd/O Vilasrao Pande Vs State of Maharashtra, Ministry of Revenue and Forest, Mumbai through Secretary and Others

Vijay Madhukar Raut and Others Vs the Director of Municipal Administration, Mumbai and Others

M/S Omprakash Shivprakash, Akola, Thr. Partner, Ajayprakash Kaluram Agrawal and Others Vs Punjab National Bank Akola, Thr. Its Branch Manager and Another

Kaluram Food Products Ltd., Akola, Thr. Its Director, Ajayprakash K. Agrawal and Others Vs Punjab National Bank Thr. Its Branch Manager, Akola and Another