MOHAR BHAGAVATRAO LAKHE & Ors. v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
line noted above, this Petition is disposed off
Provisions considered
Judgment
MOHAR BHAGAVATRAO LAKHE AND OTHERS VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND ANOTHER ... Advocate for Petitioners: Mr. Nimbalkar Aniruddha A AGP for Respondent/State: Mr. P. S. Patil ... CORAM:RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND ARUN R. PEDNEKER, JJ. DATE: 15th SEPTEMBER, 2022 PER COURT:
All these Petitioners have tendered their individual offline and online proposals for seeking issuance of FL-III license. All of them have put-forth a common prayer below clause 19A, as under:-
A) By issuing a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions in the like nature the respondents may kindly be directed to decide the proposals of the petitioners seeking grant of FL-III license as per the provisions of the Maharashtra 2 wp 8188.2022 Prohibition Act, 1949 and the Maharashtra Foreign Liquor Rules, 1953 with further directions to the respondents to call the meeting of the committee for that purpose, expeditiously and within a stipulated time frame.
The learned AGP submits that the competent committee which comprises of the Respondents, would decide all proposals that were tendered prior to 2020, on or before 30.12.2022. All proposals that have been filed in the years 2021 and 2022, would be decided by 31.01.2023.
The learned Advocate for the Petitioners is satisfied.
Operative part
By recording the above statement, that these proposals would be decided within the time line noted above, this Petition is disposed off. [ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.] [RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.] marathe
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: line noted above, this Petition is disposed off
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Prohibition Act, 1949.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 15 Sep 2022. The bench was NDRA V GHUGE, ARUN R PEDNEKER, RAVINDRA V GHUGE.
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.