Dilip Namdeo Wani & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. We have considered the submissions advanced. In the light of the decision taken by the State, the Respondent Authorities would take steps in accordance with law. With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. [A.B. CHAUDHARI, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/SEPT12
Judgment
The State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary, Law & Judiciary Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032, and others. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.K.M. Nagarkar Advocate for Petitioners. Shri.S.V. Kurundkar, Government Pleader for Respondent Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Shri.R.N. Dhorde, Senior Counsel for Respondent No.2. Shri.V.D. Hon Advocate for Respondent No.7. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND A.B. CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATE : 24TH SEPTEMBER, 2012. PER COURT :
Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2 wp611.12
Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the proposal has been submitted by the Respondents in respect of adequate compensation to the Petitioners, who are occupying the premises under reservation Nos.34 and 39 of the town planning scheme of Shirdi township.
Shri. Kurundkar, learned Government Pleader has placed on record a copy of communication dated 11th September, 2012, informing that the State had, in principle, rejected the proposal.
Shri Nagarkar, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that probably the authorities must not have forwarded appropriate proposal and that is why the State rejected the same. The learned counsel submits that in case appropriate proposal would have been forwarded, the State would have considered the same. 3 wp611.12
Shri. Dhorde, learned senior counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 submits that on State's refusal of the proposal, the law will take its own course and the Collector would take appropriate steps in accordance with law.
Shri. Hon, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.7, submits that appropriate steps would be taken by the Authorities concerned, in accordance with law.
Operative part
We have considered the submissions advanced. In the light of the decision taken by the State, the Respondent Authorities would take steps in accordance with law. With these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of. [A.B. CHAUDHARI, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/SEPT12
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 24 Sep 2012. The bench was D A B CHAUDHARI, A B CHAUDHARI, NARESH H PATIL.
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.