Dismissed

The Station Hq Kamptee Thr. Its Station Commander v. the Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Thr. the Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur and Ors.

Bombay HC11 Oct 2024WP/5172/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the constituent of Union of India challenging the appointment of a building committee under the Works of Defence Act, 1903, holding that since the subject building is completed with an occupancy certificate, no reason exists to entertain the writ petition for amendment or filling legislative vacuum via circulars.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with no order as to costs.

The Station Hq Kamptee Thr. Its Station… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 WP-5172 of 2024 -Operative Part.odt

¶2

2024:BHC-NAG:11387-DB

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.5172 OF 2024

¶4

OPERATIVE PART

¶5

CORAM : BHARATI DANGRE AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ. DATE : 11th OCTOBER, 2024

¶6

For the reasons separately recorded, finding no merit in the
contentions advanced on behalf of the petitioner-Union of India as regards
the applicability of the provisions of the Circular/Notification issued from
time to time, for filling the vacuum, awaiting amendment in the Works of
Defence Act, 1903 and further arriving at a conclusion that when the
subject-building was constructed and completed, no clarity emerged as
regards applicability of the Circular, and as on date since we find that the
building is already completed, with the occupancy certificate being
granted, we see no reason to entertain the petition.

¶7

As a result, the petition must fail and it is accordingly dismissed
with no order as to costs.

¶8

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

¶9

LANJEWAR

The Station Hq Kamptee Thr. Its Station Commander v. the Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Thr. the Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Station Hq Kamptee Thr. Its Station Commander v. the Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Thr. the Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ku. Sandhya Shrawan Makarande @ Mrs. Sandhya Uddhav Samudre Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Department of Higher and Technical Education, Mumbai and Ors.

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Thr Its Authorized Representative Mr Narendra Dekate and Others Vs Janus Aviation Pvt. Ltd. Borjhar Guwahati Assam

Adwait Sanjay Kamdi Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Principal Secy., Dept. of Education, Mumbai and Ors.

Vineet Sing Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd., Thr. Auth. Officer, Adv. Sachin Kulkarni Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Water Resource Dept., Mumbai and Others

Lina Vishwanath Yerme Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. the Secretary, Schol Education Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Chetan S/O Kantibhai Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Collector, Gondia and Another