SHRI SANTOSH S/O ARJUNRAO CHOUDHARI v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI AND OTHERS
WP/3402/2019 · 2026-08-27
body2017
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2017 DAILYLAW 3192 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2017 DAILYLAW 3192 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
(1) 30-WP-5272-2017 (Disposed) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5272/2017 SANTOSH S/O ARJUNRAO CHOUDHARI VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI AND OTHERS WITH WRIT PETITION NO.3402/2019 SHRI SANTOSH S/O ARJUNRAO CHOUDHARI VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI AND OTHERS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 88/2023 AMAN SHAH HUSSAIN SHAH VS THE STATE OF MAHA., THR. SECY. MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPT., MUMBAI AND ORS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. B.R. Damodar, Advocate for the Petitioner (s) in WP/5272/2017 and WP/3402/2019. Mr. M.P. Kariya, Advocate for the Petitioner (s) in WP/88/2023. Mr. P.P. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.5. Mr. N.R. Patil, AGP, for the Respondent-State.
CORAM :
ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.
DATE :
AUGUST 27, 2026.
1. Heard.
2. Mr. P.P. Deshmukh, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 5-Municipal Council has tendered across the Bar pursis and with the pursis is annexed the decision taken by the General Body in the meeting held on 18.08.2026. Kartikeya 2026:BHC-NAG:11219-DB
(2) 30-WP-5272-2017 (Disposed)
3. It appears that the Municipal Council has taken a decision to consider the request made by the petitioner,subject to certain conditions. The pursis is taken on record.
4. The petitioners are satisfied with the developments. The counsel, however, makes a request that the decision taken by the General Body should be implemented within four weeks from today.
5. We would only direct the Municipal Council to take steps as expeditiously as possible and preferably within four weeks from today.
6. The petitions are accordingly disposed of as purpose served. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) Kartikeya