Disposed¶26

Navin Khimji Chheda v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC17 Mar 2025WP/687/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Correction of order dated 16-12-2024; typographical error; omission of word 'not'; Respondent No.2-BMC; monetary compensation; commercial establishment; eligibility; affidavit; stand over to 10-02-2025; caption 'for directions'; Writ Petition No. 687 of 2024; Bombay High Court OOCJ; Gadkari and Khata JJ.; T Ward; Sub-Engineer Roads; State of Maharashtra.

What did the court decide?

No final relief decided; time granted to the Petitioner's advocate to take instructions, matter stood over to 10th February 2025 to be listed under the caption 'for directions', and correction and re-upload of the Order dated 16th December 2024 directed. ¶26

Navin Khimji Chheda vs the State of Maharashtra — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

ssm 13-wp687.2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 687 OF 2024

¶5

Navin Khimji Chheda …..Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. …..Respondents

¶8

Mr. Ajay Talreja for the Petitioner.

¶9

Ms. Gaurangi Patil, AGP, for the Respondent-State. Mr. Chaitanya Chavan a/w Adv. Pushpa Yadav for the Respondent No.2BMC.

¶10

Mr. Sandeep Deshpande, Asstt. Engineer Maint. T Ward and Ms. Minakshi Rathod, Sub-Engineer Roads present.

¶11

CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND KAMAL KHATA, JJ. DATE : 3^rd FEBRUARY, 2025.

¶12

P.C.:-

¶13

Learned Advocate for the Respondent No.2-BMC submitted

¶14

that, there is an error in first sentence of paragraph No.1 of Order dated 16^th December, 2024. He submitted that, the word “not” between the words ‘is’ and ‘eligible’ appearing in the second line of paragraph No.2 has erroneously not been typed.

¶15

1.1) That, as a matter of fact, the Petitioner is not eligible for monetary compensation for his commercial establishment.

¶16