Disposed

Ahmed Amin Aherwadi v. the City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maha. Limited and Ors.

Bombay HC7 Jul 2022WP/7949/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged cancellation of a tender for land plots without reasons. Court held Petitioner has remedy before the Managing Director and disposed of the writ petition by directing filing of representation within one week.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to file representation before Managing Director within one week; further proceedings in the writ petition stayed.

Ahmed Amin Aherwadi Vs the City and Industrial… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

Digitally signed by HEMANT HEMANT CHANDERSEN CHANDERSEN SHIV SHIV Date:

¶2

34.aw7949.22.doc

¶3

Date: 2022.07.11 11:21:40 +0530

¶4

Shiv

¶5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.7949 OF 2022

¶7

Ahmed Amin Aherwadi … Petitioner
 Versus

¶8

The City and Industrial Development
Corporation of Maha. Ltd. & Ors. … Respondents

¶9

Mr. Anand Bhangare for the Petitioner.
Mrs. M. P. Thakur AGP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. G. S. Hegde a/w Ms. P. M. Bhansale for Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶10

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &

¶11

 S. M. MODAK, JJ.

¶12

 DATED : 7TH JULY 2022

¶13

P.C.:

¶14

1.The grievance of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner had applied
for the plots pursuant to the Advertisement. The Petitioner has
deposited EMD. For six months, EMD is lying with the Respondent-
CIDCO. Abruptly, the tender is cancelled without assigning reasons. The
same is arbitrary.

¶15

2.Learned Counsel for the Respondent-CIDCO submits that even
otherwise the Petitioner has remedy before the Managing Director of
CIDCO. The Petitioner can avail remedy. Learned Counsel for the
Respondent-CIDCO also disputes the contention of the Petitioner.

¶16

1/2

¶17

34.aw7949.22.doc

¶18

3.In view of the fact that the Petitioner has remedy before
Managing Director of CIDCO, as contended by learned Counsel for
CIDCO, we are not inclined to go into the merits of the contentions of
the parties, they are kept open.

¶19

4.The Petitioner may file representation/application with Managing
Director, within a period of one week from today. If such
representation/application is filed within one week from today, the
Managing Director shall consider the said representation/application
and take a decision according to its own merits and according to
law/policy, preferably within six weeks from the date of receipt of the
representation/ application. The Petitioner may appear before the
Managing Director.

¶20

5.Till the decision is taken by the Managing Director, further
proceeding regarding allotment of writ land may not be undertaken.
Depending upon the decision taken by the Managing Director, further
steps be undertaken.

¶21

6. In view of the aforesaid, the above Writ Petitions are disposed of.

¶22

(S. M. MODAK, J.)

¶23

(S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)

Ahmed Amin Aherwadi v. the City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maha. Limited and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ahmed Amin Aherwadi v. the City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maha. Limited and 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

Pramod Arun Vishe and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Secretary and Anr.

Hinustan Antibiotics Ltd. Thr. Authorized Officer Mrs. Sunita N. Shivatare Vs Hindustan Antibiotics Retired Employees Association Thr. President D.Acharekar

Ketki Manoj More Vs State of Maharashtra through Dept. of Medical , Edu. and Drugs and Ors.

Ansari Ahmed Mohammed Yusuf Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Jagdish Swarath Giri Vs the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and 2 Ors.

The President Maharashtra Shivai Sahitya Kala Prathisthan Vaduj and Anr. Vs Vitthal Tulshiram Satpute and Anr.