All Cases

Order - Status 5: pdp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2129 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2146 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of appearances, Court's or Judge's orders Court's orders or directions & Registrar Registrar's orders. Mr. G. K. Anand i/by Mohd. Shine with S. S. Bijlani for petitioners in WP No. 2129 of 2016. Mr. G. K. Anand i/by Manish Rai for petitioners in WP No. 2146 of 2016. Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for State. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ **.** July 05, 2016. P.C. : Issue notice to respondents, returnable after four weeks i.e. 2/8/2016. Learned APP waives notice on behalf of respondent no.1 – State. Till the next date i.e. 2/8/2016, we direct that no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners in respect of the subject crime. However, it is clarified that there is no stay to the investigation. (PRAKASH D. NAIK *,* J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)

Order - Status 7: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2129 OF 2016 WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2146 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr.Mohd.Shine with S.S.Bijlani for Petitioner in WP No.2146 of 2016. Mr.G.K.Masand i/by Manish Rai for Petitioner in WP No.2129 of 2016. Mr.Kanishk Jayant with Mr.Harvinder Singh for Respondent no.2. Mrs.S.D.Shinde, APP, for State. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ. DATE : 2nd August 2016 PC :­ 1. Not on board. Upon mentioning taken on board. 2. Heard. Learned counsel for Respondent no.2 appears. Stand over to 10 August 2016. Ad­interim relief granted earlier to continue till 10 August 2016. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PEITION NO.2129 OF 2016 Commander Kamaljeet Singh Bhatti (Retired) & Ors. Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PEITION NO.2146 OF 2016 Ghara Singh (Retired) & Anr. .. Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents …... Mr. Mohd. Shine a/w. S.S. Bijlani, Advocate for the Petitioners in W.P. No.2129 of 2016. Mr.G.K. Masand i/b. Mr.Manish Rai, Advocate for the Petitioners in W.P.No.2146 of 2016. Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for Respondent - State in both the petitions. Mr. Kanishk K. Jayant, Advocate for Respondent Respondent no.2 in both the petitions. …... CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ. DATED : AUGUST 11, 2016. P.C. : Heard learned counsel appearing for petitioners. Following issues arise for consideration: (a) Whether petitioners belong to Scheduled Caste in relation to the State of Maharashtra; (b) Whether petitioners belong to Scheduled Caste in the State of Punjab; (c) Whether FIR/complaint registered against accused persons attracts penal provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for short "the SC & ST Act") 2 In the facts and reading compliant whether penal offence is attracted, learned counsel appearing for petitioners places reliance on following judgments: (a) Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao Vs. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College & Ors. 1 (b) State of Mahrashtra Vs. Milind & Ors. 2 (c) Gorige Pentaiah Vs. State of A.P. & Ors. 3 (d) Ghanshyam Kala s/o. Jagat Ram Kala Vs. The State 4 (e) Udaysingh Ramsingh Pawar Vs. The State of Maharashtra 5 (e) Dhiren Prafulbhai Shah Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors. 6 1 (1990) 3 SCC 130 2 (2001) 1 SCC 4 3 (2008) 12 SCC 531 4 2009(1) Uttaranchal Decision 639 5 2003(3) Mh.L.J 225 6 (2010) 8 SCC 775 3 Learned counsel appearing for complainant prays for dismissal of these petitions. It was submitted that complainant belongs to Scheduled Caste in the State of Punjab and in relation to the State of Maharashtra, the issue is required to be considered on a broader prospective. Learned counsel referred to Article 17 of the Constitution of India. 4 Learned APP submits that investigation is likely to be completed within three to four weeks. 5 We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. We find that the issues raised by petitioners for consideration. 6 Rule. Rule returnable early. 7 In the meantime, further proceedings consequent to registration of FIR stands stayed. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2129 OF 2016 Commander Kamaljeet Singh Bhatti (Retired) & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2146 OF 2016 Mr. Ghara Singh (Retired) & Anr. .. Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents Mr.Mohd. Shine i/b S.S. Bijlani for petitioners in WP/2129/2016. Mr.Manish Rai for petitioner in WP/2146/2016. Mr.F.R. Shaikh, APP for respondent No.1-State. Mr.Kaushik Jayant a/w. Ms. Antra Jayant, Mr. Nilesh Mandavkar, Mr. Rajye Jain i/b Kanishk Jayant for respondent No.2 in WP/2129/2016 and WP/2146/2016. CORAM : RANJIT MORE & N.J. JAMADAR, JJ. DATE : 9TH OCTOBER 2019 P.C. 1. Not on board. Mentioned, in view of urgency. Taken on production board. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties in both petitions. 3. The subject first information report bearing C.R. No. II-15/2016, dated 18-05-2016 on the complaint of the respondent No.2 (in both petitions) for the offences punishable under section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 read with section 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955. The petitioners in Writ Petition No.2146 of 2016, are the original accused Nos.1 and 2 in the subject crime and the petitioners in Writ Petition No.2129 of 2016 are the original accused Nos.3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 in the subject crime. 4. Pending investigation of the subject crime, the parties have settled their dispute amicably and accordingly the complainantrespondent No.2 has submitted consent terms before the Civil Judge, Senior Division-Panvel in Hindu Marriage Petition No.297 of 2015. The copy of the consent terms presented before the Court. Clause (4) of the consent terms reads as under :- 4 The petitioner Husband has agreed to give his consent for quashing of FIR filed by him bearing No. II-15/2016 dated 18 th May 2016 u/s 3(1)(10) of Atrocities Act, 1989 and section 7(1)(5) of Protection of Civil Rights Act. 1955 with CBD Police Station, Navi Mumbai against father of the Respondent i.e., the Gharasingh Chahal, Gurmit Kaur, Gurbax Singh, Hardeep Singh Anjan, Mehersingh Randhava, K.J.S. Bhatti, Gurinderjit Saini. The Petitioner-husband is agreed to give his consent and/or file an affidavit to that effect in Writ Petition bearing No. 2146 of 2016 and Writ Petition bearing No. 2129 of 2016 filed in respect of said FIR bearing No.II-15/2016." 5. In view of the above understanding, the parties have approached this Court for quashing the subject crime. The respondent No.2 has filed a common affidavit dated 9 th October 2019 in both Writ Petitions, i.e., Writ Petition No.2146 of 2016 and Writ Petition No. 2129 of 2016 and in paragraph 6 thereof, has given consent to the withdrawal of all the charges levelled in the subject crime. The respondent No.2 is personally present in Court and on specific query by this Court, confirmed that he has no objection to quash the subject FIR. 6. It can, thus, be seen that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. From the perusal of complaints, it transpires that the allegations are totally personal in nature. In these circumstances, and especially, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab 1 , we find that no purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending except burdening the Criminal Courts which are already overburdened. Accordingly, both petitions are allowed in terms of prayer clause (a), respectively. However, at the same time, costs need to be saddled on the petitioners for using the police and judicial machinery for settling their personal disputes. In view of this, the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 2146 of 2016 and Writ Petition No. 2129 of 2016 to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- as costs in each petition. The total amount of Rs.20,000/- to be paid to "Tata Memorial Hospital", an institution that takes care of the patients suffering from cancer at advanced stage and/or terminally ill due to cancer. For the quashment to take effect, the petitioners shall pay the said costs and produce the receipt thereof on the file of this Court within the period of four weeks from today. Failing to pay cost and produce receipt within stipulated time, petitions shall stand dismissed automatically without further reference 1 2014 AIR SCW 2065 to the Court and order quashing the proceedings/FIR shall be treated as non-est. 8. Subject to above, the writ petitions stand disposed of. [ N.J. JAMADAR, J. ] [ RANJIT MORE, J.]

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 818 OF 2015 Mr. Ismail S/o. Mehmoob Sayyed ... Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr.A.M.Saraogi, Advocate,for the applicant. Ms. Rutuja Ambekar, APP, for the State CORAM: SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV,J. DATE : 2nd July, 2015. P.C . Heard. This is an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. The applicant herein is apprehending his arrest in Crime No.249 of 2014 registered at Basant Park (Chembur) Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 420 read with Section 34 of IPC. The applicant had approached the Court of Sessions seeking pre-arrest bail in the year 2014. By an order dated 30.5.2014, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge had directed the Investigating Officer to give 48 hours' notice to the applicant prior to his arrest. The application was disposed of. Mhi 2 ABA-818-15.sxw The Senior Inspector of Police of Chembur Police Station had requested the officer in charge of Aurad Police Station, Dist. Bidar, Karnataka State that the present applicant is wanted in Crime No.249 of 2014 registered at Chembur Police Station and in the eventuality that the applicant is traced, he shall be detained and the information be relegated to Chembur Police Station. It is pertinent to note that the police personnel of Chembur Police Station had made several visits to serve a 48 hours notice upon the applicant, but to no avail as his permanent address is not known. It appears that the applicant is absconding. The learned counsel for the applicant has fairly submitted that the applicant was not even arrested in the offence registered against him at Aurad Police Station. The whereabouts of the applicant are not known. There is no impugned order which may be challenged before this Court under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. In view of this, the applicant doe not deserve the discretionary relief in the nature of pre-arrest bail. Hence, the application being sans merits, stands rejected. (SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5339 OF 2013 Shri Bartol Degin Farnat and Ors ..Petitioners Vs. Shri Pascol Manvel Gonsalves and Ors ..Respondents Ms. Neeta Karnik,for the Petitioners. Mr. P. B. Shah i/b Mr. Kayval P. Shah,for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : RAVI K. DESHPANDE *,* J. DATE : JULY 1, 2013. P. C.: 1 Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2 The learned counsel for the PetitionersPlaintiffs submits that it is the case of the Plaintiffs that the road in question is of 20 feet wide and it has been reduced to 2.8 feet because of the obstruction created by the Defendants in the way. With the assistance of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, I have gone through the orders passed by both the Courts below. Both the Courts below have taken into consideration the report of the Commissioner. However, there is no finding recorded, on prima facie assessment of the case on the question whether there existed 20 feet road and that it was reduced to 2.8 feet by the Aswale 1/2 5339.13.wp Defendants by creating obstruction. In the absence of any such finding, the orders impugned cannot be sustained. The same needs to be quashed and set aside. The orders are required to be remanded back to the Trial Court for decision afresh in accordance with law. 3 In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed. 4 The order dated 28.09.2011 passed by the Trial court and also by the Appellate Court dated 12.04.2013 are hereby quashed and set aside. 5 The matter is remitted back to the Trial Court to decide Exhibit5 filed in Regular Civil Suit No. 159 OF 2009, afresh within a period of three months from the date of first appearance of the parties before it. 6 Parties to appear before the Trial Court on 15.07.2013. 7 The Trial Court is at liberty to grant adinterim relief, if such is claimed by the parties. ( RAVI K. DESHPANDE *,* J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELALTE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 358 OF 2009 Sou. Ushadevi Sambhaji Patil ...... Applicant. V/s The State of Maharashtra ....... Respondent. Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Senior Counsel with Mr. Niranjan Mundargi for the applicant. Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP for the State. ALONGWITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.359 OF 2009 Shri Sambhaji Anandrao Patil ....... Applicant. V/s. The State of Maharashtra ...... Respondent. Mr. A.P. Mundargi, Senior Counsel with Mr. Niranjan Mundargi for the applicant. Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP for the State. CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 17 th February, 2009 P.C.: Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicants and the learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. Applicants apprehend arrest in connection with the offence punishable under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged that the present applicants have defrauded depositors to the tune of Rs 8,27,27,308/. In the affidavit in reply filed by the State it is stated that loans have been given to fictitious and bogus persons who are not in existence. Taking into consideration the allegations which are levelled in the complaint and the affidavit in reply filed by the State, no case is made out for grant of anticipatory bail. Both these applications for anticipatory bail are accordingly rejected. Both these applications are disposed of. (V.M. KANADE, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.414/2009 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.359/2009 Office notes,Office Memoranda of Coram Appearances,Court's orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Court's or Judge's order Mr.Pradeep Gole for the Applicant Mr.Kharge,APP for State CORAM: MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J. DATE : 7th October,2009 P.C. . The learned counsel for the applicant/ original accused submits that he has served the respondents thrice. However, despite of the service they are not appearing. This Revision Application is filed against the concurrent findings of the conviction of the Sessions Court ,Satara and the J.M.F.C. Satara. Thereby convicting the applicant for the offence punishable u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ordering the applicant/accused to pay compensation of Rs.30,000/- .The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has already deposited . Rs.30,000/- . The Revision Application is admitted. Issue notice to the respondents. R/o 30/11/2009. The bail application is pressed. The applicant accused is released on bail of Rs.10,000/- with one surety in like amount. The bail application is disposed of. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika & Ors. … Respondents Mr.Ram Baboo Upadhyay a/w. Mr. Santosh Kumar Dube i/b. Law Competere Consults for the Petitioner. Ms.Tanvi Kamal Deasthale i/b. Mr. Mayuresh Lagu for Respondent No. 1 Corporation. Mrs.M.P.Thakur, AGP for the State. Ms.Sai Wadke – Legal Offer of Respondent No. 1 Corporation, present in person. CORAM : S.J.KATHAWALLA, & B.P.COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATE : 4TH FEBRUARY, 2020 P.C. : The Corporation to fle its Afdavit in Reply on 6th February, 2020. Stand over to 6th February, 2020. ( B.P.COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and others … Respondents Mr. Ram Baboo Upadhyay alongwith Mr. Santoshkumar Dube instructed by Law Competere Consultus for the Petitioner. …...... …...... Mr. Mayuresh Lagu for the Respondent-Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Tejas Deshpande for Mr. Jagdishkumar Gupta - Proposed Intervenor. CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA AND B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 6, 2020. P.C. :- The Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner states that he is not pressing any allegations against Mr. Jagdish Kumar Gupta in the above Writ Petition. The statement is accepted. Stand over to 7th February, 2020. ( B.P. COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and others … Respondents …...... Mr. Ram Baboo Upadhyay alongwith Mr. Santosh Kumar Dube instructed by Law Competere Consultus for the Petitioner. Mr. Mayuresh Lagu for Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation – Respondent. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the Respondent-State. Mr. Nandkishore Deshmukh, Tahsildar, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika. Mr. Chandrakant Laxman Borse, Ward Ofcer, present. Ms. Saee Wadke, Law Ofcer, present. …...... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA AND B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 7, 2020. P.C. :- Mr. Chandrakant Laxman Borse, Ward Ofcer, who is present in Court states that most of the debris which was dumped on the subject land is removed and the balance debris shown in the photographs shall be forthwith removed. He also states that the Corporation will ensure that no debri is dumped by any individual/frm/company on the subject land. The statement is accepted. The Respondents are allowed to fle Afdavit-in-rejoinder/Additional Afdavit, if any, on or before 14th February, 2020. Stand over to 14th February, 2020. ( B.P. COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and others … Respondents …...... Mr. Ram Upadhyay instructed by Law Competere Consultus for the Petitioner. Mr. Mayuresh S. Lagu for Respondent No.1. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for Respondent-State. …...... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA AND B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 14, 2020. P.C. :- The Learned Advocate appearing for the Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika states that the debris has been removed in its entirety. The Learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner disagree with the said statement. The Registrar ( Judicial-I) shall therefore appoint an Ofcer to visit the site on 15th February, 2020 and submit his report setting out whether any debris is found on the subject plots and submit his report to this Court on 18th February, 2020. The Ofcer appointed by the Registrar ( Judicial-I) shall co-ordinate with the Advocates for the parties, on the following numbers :- Advocate Ram Upadhyay for the Petitioner : 77383 87168 Advocate Mayuresh Lagu for the Respondent : 9821049290 2. The costs of the Commissioner shall be borne by the Petitioner. The Ofcer shall also take photographs and annex the same to his report. The representatives of the parties shall remain present when the Court Ofcer visits the subject plot. Stand over to 18th February, 2020. ( B.P. COLABAWALLA, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak ....Petitioner V/S The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahangarpalika Bhayandar And Ors ....Respondent CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ DATE : 18th February, 2020 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 25/02/2020 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak ....Petitioner V/S The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahangarpalika Bhayandar And Ors ....Respondent CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA & R. I. CHAGLA, JJ DATE : 25th February, 2020 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 03/03/2020 . In case any ad-interim/interim relief is operating till today, the said order will continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim/interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.854 OF 2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner versus The Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and Ors. … Respondents None for Petitioner. Mrs. Ashwini A. Purav, AGP, for State. CORAM: S.J. KATHAWALLA & R.I.CHAGLA, JJ. DATE: 3 rd MARCH, 2020 P.C.: None appear for the Petitioner. Since the matter is called out after 5.00 p.m., stand over to 26th March, 2020. ( R.I.CHAGLA, J. ) ( S.J.KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 23: Digitally signed by Kanchan P. Dhuri Date: 2020.10.14 13:37:35 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WP-854-2020 Ajay Ramavtar Pathak … Petitioner Versus Commissioner of Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika and others … Respondents …...... Mr. Prem Upadhye alongwith Dharmesh Singh instructed by Law Competere for the Petitioner. Mr. Mayuresh Lagu for Respondent No.1. Ms. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the State. …...... CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA AND RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 13, 2020. P.C. :- By the above Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks the following reliefs :- "(a) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondents for immediate demolition of the illegal structures/Factories/of whatsoever nature and evict the illegal occupants from the plot of lands bearing survey numbers (all Hissas and parts of ) 111, 112, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123/1, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147/2, 148, 149, 150 and 151 at village Velkaripada opposite river Laxmi of Village Chene. (b) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondents to Completely Remove debris's dumped on the plot of lands bearing survey numbers (all hissas and parts of ) 111, 112, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123/1, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147/2, 148, 149, 150 and 151 at village Velkaripada opposite river laxmi of Village Chene forthwith and bring it to its original topography as delay in removing the debris's is resulting into regular submerging of the plots and property of the inhabitant of the Velkaripada village and of the petitioner. The Costs for removal of debris be recovered from the land owners and its illegal occupants with heavy penalties and penal action. (c) This Hon'ble court be pleased to direct the respondent to remove obstructions in the Natural water fow due to closing of the water drainage constructed by the concerned authorities of the respondent No. 1 and also to properly reconstruct the Naala and provide a proper storm water drain for the water to fow through it smoothly as per Communication Report Of The Mira Bhayandar Mahanagarpalika, Dated : 23.04.2018 Exhibit 'R' attached herewith, so as to maintain the natural surrounding and serenity of the area and avoid stagnation of water which has resulted into breeding of harmful mosquitoes and other insects and also submerging of the plots and property of the petitioners and the other inhabitants of village Velkaripada. (d) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct respondents to remove the tin sheds abutting Petitioner's property by covering the boundary wall of plot having survey number 147/1 & 3 and 123/2 and also illegal dumping of debris near the plot, same being illegal and not authorized under the law." The grievance of the Petitioner made in the Writ Petition is quite serious. Despite the Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation having assured the Court as far back as on 7th February, 2020 that they will remove the debris which was dumped on the subject land, the dumping of debris on the subject land has continued. However, today an order dated 30th September, 2020 issued by the Learned Municipal Commissioner, Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation is placed before us whereunder the Municipal Commissioner, after taking cognizance of the grievance of the Petitioner made in the above Writ Petition and the orders passed by the Court from time to time, has proceeded to form a Committee to consider and decide the issues set out in the said order. The Committee so constituted shall within a period of eight weeks from today, after hearing the Advocate for the Petitioner and considering the documents provided by him to the Committee, submit its report to the Municipal Commissioner setting out its views/suggestions qua the issues placed before them and the Corporation shall forthwith take steps to comply with the same. In addition to the issues set out in the order passed by the Learned Commissioner, the Committee shall also consider the allegations made by the Petitioner qua the unauthorized construction/business carried out on the subject land and set out its fndings in the report submitted to the Corporation. The above Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to fle a fresh Petition if his grievance is not resolved despite this order. This order will be digitally signed by the PA/PS of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order. ( RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J. ) ( S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5380 OF 2006 Jayprakash Kalicharan ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors., ....Respondent Shri.Amogh Singh i/by Anil D.yadav For Petitioner Shri A.R.Metkari, AGP for State. CORAM : A.A. SAYED, J DATE : 29th November, 2016 P.C. : To be placed on the Final Hearing Board in the week commencing from 05.12.2016. To be kept a/w W.P.Nos.7975/2006 and 5393/2006. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5380 OF 2006 Jayprakash Kalicharan ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors., ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7975 OF 2006 Shaileshkumar Radheshyam Dubey ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5393 OF 2006 Shivshyam Vijaynarayan Singh ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent None for Petitioner None for Respondent CORAM : RAJESH G. KETKAR, J DATE : 16th June, 2017 P.C. : None for Petitioners/Respondent,matter to be placed in the week commencing from 10/07/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5380 OF 2006 Jayprakash Kalicharan ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors., ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7975 OF 2006 Shaileshkumar Radheshyam Dubey ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5393 OF 2006 Shivshyam Vijaynarayan Singh ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent Adv. Anil K.Singh i.b. ADV.Anil D.yadav For Petitioner Ms.kumud A. Bhatia For R.no.1 ( V.p. Filed) Government Pleader For R.no.3 For Respondent CORAM : RAJESH G. KETKAR, J DATE : 13th July, 2017 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the petitioners, Stand over to 20/07/2017 as a last chance. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5380 OF 2006 Jayprakash Kalicharan ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors., ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7975 OF 2006 Shaileshkumar Radheshyam Dubey ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5393 OF 2006 Shivshyam Vijaynarayan Singh ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent CORAM : RAJESH G. KETKAR, J DATE : 20th July, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 10/08/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5380 OF 2006 Jayprakash Kalicharan ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors., ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7975 OF 2006 Shaileshkumar Radheshyam Dubey ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5393 OF 2006 Shivshyam Vijaynarayan Singh ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent Adv. Anil Singh i.b. Adv.Anil D.yadav For Petitioner Ms.kumud A. Bhatia For R.no.1 ( V.p. Filed) Government Pleader For R.no.3 For Respondent CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J DATE : 10th August, 2017 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the petitioners, Stand over to 18/08/2017 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5380 OF 2006 Jayprakash Kalicharan ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors., ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7975 OF 2006 Shaileshkumar Radheshyam Dubey ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5393 OF 2006 Shivshyam Vijaynarayan Singh ....Petitioner V/S The President- Rashtrabhasha Mahavidyalaya And Ors. ....Respondent CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE, J DATE : 18th August, 2017 P.C. : Matter to be placed in the week commencing from 28/08/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 21: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5380 OF 2006 Jaiprakash Kalicharan … Petitioner V/s. The President-Rashtabhasha Mahavidyalaya & Ors. … Respondents ----- Mr.Amogh Singh i/b. Mr.Anil D.Yadav, for the Petitioner. Ms.Kumud A.Bhatia, for Respondent No.1. Mr.P. P. Pujari, AGP for the State. C0RAM : G. S. KULKARNI, J. DATE : 28 October, 2021 PC : Learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for respondent nos.1 have tendered the consent terms stating that the disputes and differences between the parties stand settled in terms of the consent terms. The consent terms are signed by the petitioner and by the President of respondent no.1 on behalf of respondent no.1. The signatures of the parties are identified their respective Advocates who have also initialed the consent terms. There is no dispute on the signatures as made on the consent terms. The consent terms are taken on record and marked "X" for identification. Writ Petition stands disposed of in terms of the consent terms. No costs. (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) Digitally PRASHANT VILAS RANE Date: 2021.11.01 20:02:01 +0530 PRASHANT VILAS RANE