Disposed

M/S Aai Tuljabhawani Transport Ahmednagar, Thr. Partner, Gaurav Bhagwan Harba v. the Central Warehousing Coporation, New Delhi Thr. Managing Director and Others

Bombay HC15 Mar 2022WP/523/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of the writ petition. It ordered the Respondent Authority to provide a fresh hearing on 23 March 2022 and pass a fresh order by 1 April 2022. The ad interim order was continued till the fresh decision.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; fresh hearing to be given by Respondent; ad interim order continued.

M/S Aai Tuljabhawani Transport Ahmednagar, Thr… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

1503wp523.22

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.523 OF 2022

¶5

M/s. Aai Tuljabhawani Transport ... Petitioner - Versus -

¶6

The Central Warehousing Corporation and others ... Respondents

¶7

Shri Rohit Joshi, Advocate for Petitioner.

¶8

Shri N.C. Phadnis, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶9

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ. DATE : 15 MARCH 2022

¶10

P.C. :

¶11

Heard Shri Rohit Joshi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, and Shri Phadnis, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶12

It is not necessary to detail the facts of the case and suffice it to state that the Petitioner was not given hearing at the time of passing the impugned order. According to Respondent Nos.1 and 2, opportunity was given to the Petitioner,

¶13

2 1503wp523.22

¶14

which the Petitioner has not availed of. Be that as it may, the impugned order was passed without Petitioner being heard.

¶15

Shri Phadnis, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2, states that instead of adjourning the matter any further at the instance of the Respondents, the petition can be disposed of as the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 will give hearing to the Petitioner and pass a fresh order. The learned Counsel further states that hearing will be given to the Petitioner on 23 March 2022.

¶16

The Petitioner will contact the Respondent Authority for time of hearing on 23 March 2022 in advance, which shall be given to the Petitioner. Shri Joshi, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, states that the Petitioner will not seek any adjournment on 23 March 2022. His statement is accepted.

¶17

Shri Phadnis, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2, further states that after hearing, within a week order will be passed and communicated to the Petitioner by way of e-mail. That would be by 1 April 2022. Hearing can be either in person or through video conferencing.

¶18

Since a fresh order will be passed by the Respondent Authority, the observations made in the impugned order will be treated as prima facie opinion of the Respondent Authority.

¶19

3 1503wp523.22

¶20

In light of the fact that a fresh order will be passed by the Respondent Authority and that the impugned order will be considered as a prima facie opinion, ad interim order granted by this Court will continue till the decision is taken by the Respondent Authority. We make it clear that we have continued the ad interim order in the above circumstances and it shall not be considered as reflection on the merits of the controversy.

¶21

Writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶22

(ANIL L. PANSARE, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

¶23

khj

¶24

Digitally Signed By:KAMAL HUNDRAJ JESWANI Signing Date:17.03.2022 12:03

M/S Aai Tuljabhawani Transport Ahmednagar, Thr. Partner, Gaurav Bhagwan Harba v. the Central Warehousing Coporation, New Delhi Thr. Managing Director and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Aai Tuljabhawani Transport Ahmednagar, Thr. Partner, Gaurav Bhagwan Harba v. the Central Warehousing Coporation, New Delhi Thr. Managing Director 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

Ku. Jaishri Hitendra Dalal (Before Marriage Kumari. Sushila Vitthalrao Kurhadkar) Vs Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. Thr. Chairman and Managing Director and Another

Hrushikesh S/O Anant Buradkar Vs Smt. Sujata Saunik, Additional Chief Secretary, Gen. Administration Dept., State of Maha., Mumbai

Prakash S/O. Balkrushna Parekh and Another Vs Equitas Small Finance Bank Ltd., Amravati Thr. P.O.a., Shri. Rahul P. Dove and Anr.

Naved Ali S/O Abid Ali and Others Vs State of Maha., Thr. Secretary, Revenue and Forest Department, Mumbai and Others

Mehek Swayam Sahay Mahila Bachat Gat, Thr. Secretary, Premlata Arun Kuril and Another Vs State of Maha., Thr. Secy. Dept. of Food, Civil Supplies and Consumer Protection, Mumbai and Ors.

Amit S/O Vinodkumar Sahu and Another Vs Deputy Regional Trasnport Officer, Wardha and Another