Siddheshwar Infrastructures Through ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 22110 Bom

Bombay High Court

Siddheshwar Infrastructures Through ... vs State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 1 August, 2024

Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge

Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge

                             *1*                    921y wp6856o24


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

          921 WRIT PETITION NO. 6856 OF 2024
   SIDDHESHWAR INFRASTRUCTURES THROUGH ITS
     PARTNER DR. DHARMAVEER YOGIRAJ BHARATI
                             VERSUS
 STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY
                         AND OTHERS
                               ...
Shri V.D. Sapkal, Senior Advocate i/by Shri Dixit Sushant V.,
Advocate for the Petitioner.
Ms.Neha B. Kamble, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 4/State.
Shri S.P. Urgunde, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
                               ...

                  CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
                                   &
                          Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

DATE :- 01st August, 2024

Per Court :-

1. The circular, on which the Municipal Corporation

relies in support of the impugned order, is said to have been

quashed by the judgment of this Court dated 05.05.2022 in Writ

Petition No.2111/2022 (Govind Ramling Solapure vs. The State

of Maharashtra and others). Review Application No.246/2022

was also dismissed on 13.04.2023.

2. Respondent No.5, who claims to be a social worker *2* 921y wp6856o24

and who triggered action against the Petitioner, as is adverted in

our order dated 16.07.2024, is yet to be served.

3. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner prays for

leave to serve Respondent No.5 by substituted service by

publishing the notice in daily "Ekmat", Latur edition, which is

said to have a wide circulation.

4. Office to reissue notice to Respondent No.5,

returnable on 09.08.2024. This matter would appear in the urgent

orders category.

5. Notice be published by the Petitioner at it's cost, in

daily "Ekmat", Latur edition, at least three days prior to the

returnable date in this matter.

6. A serious grievance is made to us by the learned

Senior Advocate Shri Sapkal representing the Petitioner that

though this petition is being heard by this Court and though the

circular, on the basis of which the Commissioner claims to have

derived his power, has been quashed and set aside by this Court, *3* 921y wp6856o24

yet further notices for initiating coercive action are being issued.

As such, we direct the Commissioner to restrain himself from

issuing any further notices and the inquiry said to have been

initiated on the basis of the complaint of a bystander, shall not

proceed until further orders.

kps (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)