Disposed

M/S Anant Enterprises Throu. Its Parnters Vivek Gopalrao Joshi v. the State of Maharashtra Throu. Its Sec. Ministry of Industries Energy and Labour Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC2 May 2024WP/5106/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anant Enterprises v. State of Maharashtra — WP 5106/2024, Bombay HC, 02-05-2024 (modified 08-05-2024); MIDC land allotment; extension charges demand Rs.4,11,41,300/- challenged; allotment payment Rs.2,49,37,500/- duly paid; possession not handed over; Grievance Cell order 25-07-2023; directive of Development Commissioner; waiver of extension charges; interim protection that any allotment of the pl

What did the court decide?

Interim: notice issued to Respondent Nos.2 to 4 (returnable 27th June 2024), notice waived by the learned AGP for Respondent No.1-State, and any allotment of the plot under consideration made subject

M/S Anant Enterprises Throu. Its Parnters Vivek Gopalrao Joshi vs the State of Maharashtra Throu. Its Sec. Ministry of Industries Energy and Labour Dept and Ors. — Bombay HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

7-WP.5106.2024.modified.doc

¶2

Sayyed

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.5106 OF 2024

¶5

M/s. Anant Enterprises Through its Partners Mr. Vivek Gopalrao Joshi ..Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents

¶6

Mr. Nitin Gaware Patil a/w. Mr. Divyesh Jain for the petitioner. Ms. Kavita N. Solunke, AGP for Respondent No.1-State.

¶7

CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATE : 2^nd MAY 2024.

¶8

P.C.:

¶9

The present petition challenges communication dated 2^nd February 2024 by Respondent No.4 demanding a sum of Rs.4,11,41,300/- as extension charges. The Petitioner submits that on 28^th August 2014 an allotment letter was issued calling upon them pay a sum of Rs.2,49,37,500/- which has been duly paid. Thereafter, the land was allotted to the Petitioner but its possession was not handed over and hence the grievance was raised before Respondent No.3. The Grievance Cell on 25^th July 2023 have passed the following order:-

¶10

“The MIDC team informed that the investor is intentionally delaying the possession of land. As per the directive of Hon’ble Development Commissioner, the MIDC team to re-verify the extension period according to the by laws and waive off the necessary extension charges and give possession of land to the investor.”

¶11

1 of 2

¶12

7-WP.5106.2024.modified.doc

¶13

Sayyed

¶14

The contention of the Petitioner that in the light of the aforesaid finding, the demand made by the impugned communication dated 2^nd February 2024 is not justified.

¶15

Issue notice to the Respondent Nos.2 to 4, returnable on 27^th June 2024 . The learned Assistant Government Pleader waives notice for Respondent No.1.

¶16

Any allotment of the plot under consideration would be subject to the outcome of this petition.

¶17

[JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.]

¶18

(This order is modified as per speaking order dated 8^th May 2024.)

¶19

Signed by: Sayyed Saeed Ali Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 10/05/2024 13:27:13

¶20

2 of 2

M/S Anant Enterprises Throu. Its Parnters Vivek Gopalrao Joshi v. the State of Maharashtra Throu. Its Sec. Ministry of Industries Energy and Labour Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Anant Enterprises Throu. Its Parnters Vivek Gopalrao Joshi v. the State of Maharashtra Throu. Its Sec. Ministry of Industries Energy and Labour Dept and Ors.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jaipur Jewels Global Limited vs the Reserve Bank of India

The Maharashtra Rajya Sahakari Doodh Mahasangh Mydt. Thr. Managing Director vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary and Anr.

National Organization of Insurance Officers (Noino) vs Election Commission of India

Naina Naresh Shah vs State of Maharashtra

Somnath Janardan Bhosale vs the State of Maharashtra

M/S Anant Enterprises Throu. Its Parnters Vivek Gopalrao Joshi vs the State of Maharashtra Throu. Its Sec. Ministry of Industries Energy and Labour Dept and Ors.