Leelabai Shankarlal Jaiswal And ... vs The Government Of Maharashtra ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5966 Bom

                        1                          wp1542.21.odt




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

                    NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR



                WRIT PETITION NO. 1542 OF 2021



1.Smt. Leelabai Shankarlal Jaiswal,
  Aged about 78 years, Occ.
  Business.

2.Sanjay Shankarlal Jaiswal,
  Aged about 52 years, Occ.
  Business.

 Both r/o. Punoti Khurd, Tq.
 Barshitakli, District Akola.
 Now residing at Godbole Plot,
 Dabki Road, Akola, Tq. Dist.
 Akola.                                  .......   PETITIONERS



     // VERSUS //



1.The Government of Maharashtra,
  through Excise Department,
  Mantralaya, Mumbai.

2.The Learned Collector,
  Superintendent of State Excise
  Department, Akola, Tq. Dist.
  Akola.                              ..........     RESPONDENTS
                          2                         wp1542.21.odt


____________________________________________________________
           Mr.D.P.Bhongade, Advocate for the Petitioners.
     Mrs.Ketki Joshi, I/c. G.P. for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2.


                             CORAM   : SUNIL B. SHUKRE &
                                       AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

DATE : 1.4.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Sunil B. Shukre, J) :

1. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the

consent of Mr.D.P.Bhongade, learned Counsel for the petitioner and

Mrs.Ketki Joshi, learned I/c. Government Pleader, who appears on

waiving service for respondent nos. 1 and 2. The hearing was

conducted through Video Conferencing and the learned Counsel for

the respective parties agreed that the audio and visual quality was

proper.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners does not press prayer

clause (b) in the petition and seeks liberty to make the same prayer

before the concerned Authority. The petition as regards prayer

clause (b) of the petition is, thus, disposed of as not pressed with

liberty as aforesaid.

3 wp1542.21.odt

3. So far as prayer clause (a) in the petition is concerned, it

is a limited prayer seeking direction to respondent no.2 to decide

Application No.CLR 112021/1496 within a stipulated time. The

petition is, therefore, partly allowed.

Respondent no.2 is directed to decide the application

No.CLR 112021/1496 in accordance with law, within eight weeks

from the date of receipt of this order.

Rule accordingly.

            JUDGE                                  JUDGE



ssjaiswal
                                   Digitally
                                   signed by
                         Suraj     Suraj Jaiswal
                                   Date:
                         Jaiswal   2021.04.01
                                   16:49:14
                                   +0530