Dismissed

Shaikh Anwar Jainuddin v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC25 Apr 2022PIL/14/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, considered a PIL that had sought conversion from a writ petition. The court found the petitioner had wasted time by failing to deposit a required amount to test bonafides before seeking withdrawal. Consequently, the PIL was dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice, but the petitioner was ordered to pay costs of Rs. 15,000.

What did the court decide?

The PIL was dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice, and costs of Rs. 15,000 imposed in favour of the Maharashtra Legal Services Authority.

Mr. S. S. Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioner The petitioner is present in this court. Mr.V. D. Sapkal, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. S. R. Sapkal, Advocate with Mr. Tosif Sayyed, Advocate for the respondent No.5

1.This matter was on board on 16-03-2022 when Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to convert this writ petition into PIL. This court accordingly granted leave to amend to convert the said writ petition into PIL.

2.This matter was mentioned on 22-04-2022 with a grievance that though the circulation was granted by this court the matter did not appear on board in view of the learned Minister not having caused his appearance in the matter. This Court accordingly directed the office to place the matter

3.The papers are allowed to be produced upon mentioning of the learned counsel for the petitioner for seeking withdrawal. Mr. Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioner tenders letter dated 25-04-2022, signed by his client instructing him to withdraw the PIL.

4.The petitioner initially filed writ petition and thereafter converted into PIL. Before this court could direct the petitioner to deposit the certain amount to test bonafides of the petitioner, the petitioner now seeks liberty to withdraw this PIL. In our view the petitioner has wasted time of this court by filing such PIL. We accordingly dismiss this petition with costs quantified at Rs. 15,000/- [Rupees Fifteen Thousand]. It shall be paid by the petitioner to the Maharashtra Legal Services Authority within one week from today.

Shaikh Anwar Jainuddin v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaikh Anwar Jainuddin 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santosh Ramchandra Tatikondawar Vs the Secretary, Public Works Department, Mumbai and Others

Shaikh Abdul Majeed Abdul Mahemud Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Balvant Asaram Chavan and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bhagvanji Raiyani vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Virbhadra Basling Swami Vs Chief Secretory, the State of Maharashtra, Mumbai and Others

Adv. Firoz Babulal Sayyed Vs the Union of India and Anr.

Kailash Hari Patil Vice President Agri Sena Vs the Chief Secretary, the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vijay S/O Keshaorao Channe Vs Chief General Manager, Western Coalfields Ltd. Ballarpur and Others

Kadu Bajirao Dhumal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ramesh Janardhan Meshram Vs Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe Development Corporation through Its Managing Director and Others

Shaikh Suleman Shaikh Bhayya Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Purushottam Waman Kohad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Haribhau Vithal Pathade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kailash Manohar Wankhade Vs the Vice Chairman /Secretary and Othersmember