Dismissed

Peravali Swaminadhan v. Matoshri Pratishthan Thr Its President / Secretary and Others

Bombay HC1 Feb 2022WP/247/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad dismissed writ petitions interdicting a tribunal inquiry. Following a co-ordinate Bench, the Court found no valid reason to interdict and noted the Presiding Officer must decide pending appeals without being influenced by the dismissal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petitions dismissed with liberty as per the order dated 28.09.2021 in Writ Petition Nos. 217/2021 and 240/2021.

Peravali Swaminadhan Vs Matoshri… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

917WP200.21

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 200 OF 2021
 WITH WP/209/2021 WITH WP/213/2021
 WITH WP/216/2021 WITH WP/247/2021

¶4

Raghavendra Shrinivasrao Deshpande

¶5

….Petitioner

¶6

 Versus

¶7

Matoshri Pratishthan Through Its President/
Secretary and Others….Respondents

¶8

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Gaikwad h/f. Mr. A.G. Talhar
Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Mr. R.B. Narwade-Patil
Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Mr. N.U. Telegaonkar
Advocate for Respondent No. 4 : Mrs. Anjali Dube (Bajpai)
Advocate for Respondent No. 4 in WP/213/21 : Mr. P.P. Uttarwar
Advocate for Respondent No. 4 in WP/216/21 : Mr. S.S. Shinde
AGP for Respondent No. 6 : Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya

¶9

CORAM : A.S. GADKARI & S. G. MEHARE, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 01.02.2022

¶11

P.C. :-

¶12

1. The issues involved in the present petitions, including the question

¶13

of law, have been decided by the co-ordinate Bench presided over by the Hon’ble Chief Justice in Writ Petition Nos. 217/2021 and 240/2021,

¶14

by its order dated 28.09.2021. The reasoning given in the said order

¶15

dated 28.09.2021, is mutatis mutandis applicable to the present
group of petitions as the petitioners are similarly situated and

¶16

917WP200.21

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

governed by the same provisions of law.

¶19

There is a consensus amongst all the learned counsel appearing
for the respective parties that, the decision rendered by the co-ordinate
Bench in Writ Petition Nos. 217/2021 and 240/2021, squarely applies
to the present cases.

¶20

2.In view thereof and by following the decision in Writ Petition
Nos. 217/2021 and 240/2021, we find that, there is no valid reason to
interdict with the inquiry.

¶21

3.Writ Petitions are accordingly dismissed with liberty to the
petitioners as noted in the order dated 28.09.2021.

¶22

4.Needless to observe that, the Presiding Officer of the Tribunal will
proceed to decide the appeals pending before him without being
influenced by dismissal of these Writ Petitions.

¶23

( S. G. MEHARE, J. ) ( A.S. Gadkari, J. )

¶24

SPC

Peravali Swaminadhan v. Matoshri Pratishthan Thr Its President / Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Peravali Swaminadhan v. Matoshri Pratishthan Thr Its President / Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Farooqui Mahvish Fatema Mujahed Farooqui Vs the State of Mahrashtra and Others

M/S Ramkrushna Commercial Complex Thr Its Proprietor Rameshwar Kanhaiyalal Bharuka Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sarjerao Laxmanrao Kale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sanjaykumar Biharilal Bangad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Mahatram Phule Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Thr Its President Shambhau Dhondiba Raut Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Secretary and Others

Amol Vijay Patil Vs Matoshri Pratisthan Thr Its President / Secretary and Others