Chandrakanat P. Chavan & Ors. v. Mr.C.G.Gavnekar with Mr.G.S.Hiranandani
Case at a glance
- Bench
- ANOOP V MOHTA, B H MARLAPALLE
Outcome
Disposed of
The petition is disposed off
Provisions considered
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Writ Petition No.1845 of 2010 Ms.Sandhya Sanjay Kolte Petitioner Vs. Chandrakanat P. Chavan & ors. Respondents Mr.C.G.Gavnekar with Mr.G.S.Hiranandani for petitioner. Mr.J.P.Yagnik, APP for State. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. July 7, 2010. P.C.
Heard Mr.Gavnekar, the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Admittedly after the order dated 11/3/2010 was passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Mangaon, the petitioner has been issued notice dated 6/7/2010 by the competent authority under the Indian Forest Act, 1927 and the Bombay Forest Rules, 1942 as amended in 1999. The petitioner is required to appear before the competent authority i.e. the Assistant Conservator of Forest, Roha on 20/7/2010. 2
We have been assured by the Assistant Conservator of Forest, who is present before us, that if the petitioner appears before him on 20/7/2010 or files his reply or advances oral arguments, the seizure order will be passed or any other appropriate order will be passed by him.
Mr.Gavanekar, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will appear before the Assistant Conservator of Forest and, therefore, no further oder is required to be passed in this petition, at least at this stage.
Operative part
The application submitted by the petitioner under Section 53 of the Forest Act and which is stated to be still pending, be decided by the Assistant Conservator of Forest on 20/7/2010. The petition is disposed off and the rights and contentions of the parties are left open. (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
(B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The petition is disposed off
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Forest Act, 1927.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.