All Interlocutory Application

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT Mr. Amar Gharte for Applicant. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 14th July, 2023 P.C. : At the request of the learned Counsel for the Appellant(s)/ Applicant(s) / Petitioner(s) / Respondent No. stand over to 21/07/2023. Ad-interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In Civil Revision Application STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 21st July, 2023 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 15/09/2023. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In Civil Revision Application STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH J DATE : 23rd October, 2023 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 06/11/2023. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH J DATE : 6th November, 2023 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 11/12/2023. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.13191 OF 2023 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO.13129 OF 2023 Yang Yau Shin Applicant. V/s. Sonal Anuj Mehra Respondent. Mr. Amar Gharte a/w. Ms. Aishwarya D. for the Applicant. CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 11th DECEMBER, 2023. P.C.:- Issue notice to respondent returnable on 8/1/2024. In addition to Court notice, Applicant to serve the respondent by private notice and file affidavit of service before next date. Stand over to 8/1/2024. (SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.)

Order - Status 15: KANCHAN VINOD MAYEKAR Digitally signed by KANCHAN VINOD MAYEKAR Date: 2024.01.09 13:26:12 +0530 28 - CRAST 13129 OF 2023.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO. 13129 OF 2023 ALONGWITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION (ST) NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ….. Petitioner/ Applicant VERSUS Sonal Anuj Mehra ….. Respondent Mr.Amar Gharte a/w. Ms.Aishwarya Dangle for the Petitioner/Applicant. Ms.Sonal A.Mehra – Respondent present in person. CORAM: RAJESH S. PATIL, J. DATE : 8 JANUARY, 2024 P.C. :- After the matter was heard for some time, learned counsel appearing for the applicant on instruction from his client seeks leave to withdraw the interim application for condonation of delay along with Civil Revision Application. Interim application is disposed of as withdrawn. KVM So also, the Civil Revision Application is also disposed of. The parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order. [RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 13191 OF 2023 In CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION STAMP NO. 13129 OF 2023 Mr. Yang Yau Shin ....PETITIONER V/S Sonal Anuj Mehra ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJESH S. PATIL J DATE : 11th January, 2024 P.C. : Wrongly on board. Remove from the Board. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 17568 OF 2022 In Writ Petition 132 OF 2021 Tanzimul Muslimin Soc Sanpada Thr Abdul Samad Hasan Kazi ....PETITIONER V/S The Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKA & HON'BLE JUSTICE KAMAL KHATA, JJ DATE : 26th August, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 03/10/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 17568 OF 2022 In Writ Petition 132 OF 2021 Tanzimul Muslimin Soc Sanpada Thr Abdul Samad Hasan Kazi ....PETITIONER V/S The Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKA & HON'BLE JUSTICE KAMAL KHATA, JJ DATE : 3rd October, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 17/11/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 17568 OF 2022 In Writ Petition 132 OF 2021 Tanzimul Muslimin Soc Sanpada Thr Abdul Samad Hasan Kazi ....PETITIONER V/S The Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKA & HON'BLE JUSTICE KAMAL KHATA, JJ DATE : 17th November, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 24/11/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 17568 OF 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 132 OF 2021 Tanzimul Muslimin Society Sanpada …..Applicant Vs. MULEY SHUBHAM PRAVINRAO Digitally signed by MULEY SHUBHAM PRAVINRAO Date: 2022.11.28 10:32:04 +0530 The Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors. …..Respondents Mr. Sharique Nachan a/w Mr. Azeem Shaikh & Tanzila Kazi i/by Judicare Law Associates for Petitioner/Applicant. Mr. Tejas Dande for Respondent No.1. Ms. Sayli Patil i/by Mr. Ashutosh Kulkarni for Respondnt No.2. Mr. Y. D. Patil, AGP for State. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & ARIF S. DOCTOR, JJ. DATE : 24 th NOVEMBER, 2022. P.C.:- The learned AGP seeks time to take instructions from the Police authorities. Place the matter on 16th December, 2022. (ARIF. S. DOCTOR, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 17568 OF 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 132 OF 2022 Tanzimul Muslimin Society Sanpada .Applicant IN THE MATTER OF Tanzimul Muslimin Society Sanpada .Petitioner Vs. The Commissioner, Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation & Ors. .Respondents ----------- Mr.Sharique Nachan, Mr. Aman Khan, Mr. Wasim Karol i/b. Judicare Law Associates for the Applicant/Petitioner. Mr. Tejesh Dande for Respondent No.1-Corporation. Mr. Ashutosh M. Kulkarni for Respondent No.2-CIDCO. Ms. M. P. Thakur, AGP for Respondent Nos. 3 to 6. CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND M. W. CHANDWANI, JJ. DATE : 14 FEBRUARY 2023 P. C. . Time of one week is granted to the learned AGP to obtain instructions in terms of the order dated 24th November, 2022. The instructions shall be obtained prior to the next date of the proceedings. Stand over to 21st February, 2023. ( M. W. CHANDWANI, J. ) ( A. S. CHANDURKAR, J. )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.17568 OF 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO.132 OF 2021 Tanzimul Muslimin Society Sanpada, Navi Mumbai .. Applicant-Petitioner Vs. The Commissioner, Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation and Ors. .. Respondents Mr. Sharique Nachan, with Ms. Tanzila Kazi and Mr. Amaan Khan, i/by Judicare Law Associate, for the Applicant-Petitioner. Mr. Tejas Dande for Respondent No.1-Municipal Corporation. Mr. R.D. Soni, with Mr. Sujay Gawade and Ms. Mudita Pawar, i/by Shree & Co., for the Intervenor. Dr. Birendra B. Saraf, Advocate General, with Mr. P.P. Kakade and Ms. M.P. Thakur, AGP for Respondent Nos.3 to 6-State. CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR & M.W. CHANDWANI, JJ DATE : 21ST FEBRUARY, 2023. ORAL ORDER : { Per A.S. Chandurkar, J. } In this Interim Application, preferred by the original petitioner in Writ Petition No.132 of 2021, the following prayers have been made :- (a). This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent No.3 to appoint a suitable officer as Nodal Officer or this Hon'ble Court itself be pleased to appoint any suitable officer from the departments of the respondents as a Nodal Officer to facilitate the construction of the Masjid on the said Plot bearing No.17A, Sector 8, Navi Mumbai as per the approved plan in accordance with law. (b). This Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent No.6 to provide police protection for the construction of the Masjid at the said Plot bearing No.17A, Sector 8, Navi Mumbai." Writ Petition No.132 of 2021 was filed by the applicant raising a challenge to the communication dated 27th December 2018 issued by the Assistant Director, Town Planning, Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation, by which the applicant was informed that though on 17th November 2018, building permission had been granted by the Municipal Corporation, a likelihood of a law and order situation could arise if the construction was undertaken by the applicant. Hence, the Municipal Corporation temporarily stayed the building permission granted by it on 17th November 2018. In addition, the applicant prayed that the State of Maharashtra be directed to appoint a suitable officer as a Nodal Officer to facilitate the construction of a Masjid as per the approved plan. The aforesaid writ petition was decided on 31st January 2022. The impugned communication dated 27th December 2018 came to be set aside by observing that if the Municipal Corporation apprehended any law and order situation, it could seek necessary assistance from the local police station in that regard. The writ petition was accordingly allowed. However, the intervention application filed by Akhil Sanpada Sanskrutik Pratisthan came to be dismissed. By urging that the applicant, which was the original petitioner, was seeking implementation of the order dated 31 st January 2022 passed in Writ Petition No.132 of 2021, this interim application has been filed. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that while allowing Writ Petition No.132 of 2021, this Court had set aside the communication dated 27 th December 2018 issued by the Municipal Corporation. As a result, the temporary stay that was imposed on the building permission on 17 th November 2018 stood vacated. It was thus incumbent upon the Commissioner of Police, Navi Mumbai to provide police protection for such construction. It was also the responsibility of the authorities and especially the State Government to appoint a Nodal Officer to facilitate construction of a Masjid on a Plot No.17A, Sector 8, Navi Mumbai as per the approved plan. Placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.A. Ansari and Anr. Vs. Indian Airlines Ltd. 1 and the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Archana Nilesh Gore and Anr. (Applicant) in the matter between Archana Nilesh Gore and Anr. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. 2 , it was urged that notwithstanding the fact that the writ petition had been disposed of, this Court could consider entertaining the interim application in the disposed of writ petition as the applicant was seeking directions in the furtherance of the order passed in the writ petition. According to learned counsel, if the interim application was not 1 (2009) 2 SCC 164 2 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 12962 entertained, the applicant would be required to initiate fresh proceedings on account of inaction on the part of the authorities. The learned Advocate General for the non-applicant nos.3 to 6 as well as the learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant no.1 joined issue and opposed the interim application on the ground that the relief sought in the interim application was not in furtherance of any directions issued in the writ petition, nor could it be said that the applicant was seeking implementation of the order passed therein. The issuance of the communication dated 14th April 2022 by the Police Authorities was justified for the reason that until certain factual aspects were verified by the said authority, further instructions could not be issued by that authority. The applicant had been called upon to submit relevant documents, on the basis of which further steps would be taken in the matter. It was thus urged that the interim application need not deserve consideration and the applicant could initiate appropriate proceedings for seeking the prayers made in the interim application. The learned counsel appearing for the intervenor-Akhil Sanpada Sanskrutik Pratisthan submitted that the intervenors had filed Interim Application No.371 of 2022 seeking intervention in Writ Petition No.132 of 2021, had been dismissed by the Court on 31st January 2022 while disposing of the writ petition. That order was challenged by the intervenor by filing proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and by the order dated 9th May 2022, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that rejection of the intervention application was wrong. It was noted that the intervenor had challenged the building permission granted by the Competent Authority on 17th November 2018 by filing an appeal under Section 47 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, (for short "Act of 1966"), which appeal was pending. A direction was issued that the proceedings pending before the State Government as well as before the Layout Committee would not be governed by the order passed in Writ Petition No.132 of 2021 on 31st January 2022. Despite that, the intervenor had not been impleaded in the present interim application and on that ground, the said application was liable to be rejected. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having duly considered the rival submissions, we are of the view that the interim application does not deserve consideration. At the outset, we may note that prayer clause (a) in the interim application is ad verbatim prayer clause (b) in the writ petition, which reads as under :- "(b). This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate and suitable writ, direction and pass an order under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directing the respondent no.3 to appoint a suitable officer as Nodal Officer to facilitate the construction of Masjid on the said Plot as per the approved plan, in accordance with law." Prayer clause (b) having been sought for in the writ petition and the same not having been granted while deciding the writ petition implies that the said prayer stands refused by this Court. A prayer which was made in the writ petition but not granted while disposing of the writ petition cannot be the subject matter of an interim application in the disposed of writ petition that is filed on the premise that the original petitioner seeks implementation of the directions issued in the writ petition. The remedy for seeking a prayer not granted in the writ petition would not be by way of an interim application in the disposed of writ petition. For that reason, prayer clause (a) in the interim application cannot be considered. Coming to prayer clause (b) in the interim application, which pertains to a direction to be issued to the Commissioner of Police to provide police protection for construction of the Masjid, it is seen that while disposing of Writ Petition No.132 of 2021, this Court had observed that if the Municipal Corporation apprehends any law and order situation, it could write to the local police station, which could then provide necessary assistance so as to maintain the law and order. Accordingly, on 13th April 2022, the Assistant Director, Town Planning Department of the Municipal Corporation wrote to the Police Commissioner that the applicant had made an application to it in terms of the order passed in Writ Petition No.132 of 2021. Acting on that communication, the office of the Police Commissioner – the 6th respondent, on 14th April 2022, sought certain information from the Municipal Commissioner with a copy thereof to the applicant. This, according to the applicant, was not permissible and amounted to the Police Authorities sitting in appeal over the civil rights that had accrued in favour of the applicant pursuant to the order passed in the writ petition. In other words, the applicant is aggrieved by issuance of the communication dated 14th April 2022 and has indicated that the said authority ought not to have required furnishing of the details that are mentioned in the communication dated 14th April 2022. It is thus apparent that if the applicant is aggrieved by the communication dated 14th April 2022 on the premise that the said authority was not justified in seeking such information, it would be necessary for the applicant to challenge that communication. As long as that communication operates, prayer clause (b) seeking direction to be issued to the respondent no.6 to provide police protection cannot be considered in the interim application that has been filed in a disposed of writ petition. Perusal of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.A. Ansari and Anr. (Supra) indicates that a direction was issued by the High Court holding the petitioners therein entitled to be posted on a post in equivalent scale that was held by them with a further direction to pay them arrears of pay and allowances, if they were posted on a post of higher grade. The learned Single Judge issued the directions, as sought for, in a miscellaneous application in the disposed of writ petition. In appeal, the Division Bench held that the miscellaneous application was not maintainable since the writ petition had been disposed of. The order passed on that application was set aside by the Division Bench. In challenge to the order of the Division Bench, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that when the proceedings stand terminated by final disposal of the writ petition, it is not open to the Court to re-open the proceedings by means of a miscellaneous application in respect of a matter which provides fresh cause of action. However, at the same time, there is no prohibition on a party applying for clarification, if the order is not clear and the party against whom it has been made is trying to take advantage as the order is couched in ambiguous or equivocal words. Since it was found that the miscellaneous application was filed for pursuing and getting implemented the relief granted in the writ petition, which was for placement in the appropriate grade, it was held that the miscellaneous application was maintainable. This decision has been followed in Archana Nilesh Gore and Anr. (Supra). As noted above, prayer clause (a) in the interim application cannot be granted since a similar prayer made in the writ petition was not granted when the writ petition was disposed of. As regards prayer clause (b), unless the communication dated 14th April 2022 issued by the 6th respondent is shown to have been erroneously issued, that relief cannot be granted. The prayers made in the interim application cannot be said to be the prayers made for clarification of the order or for implementing the relief granted in the writ petition. Such request for grant of police protection was under consideration of the 6th respondent and in that regard, factual information has been sought by it. If the petitioner is aggrieved by that communication, it would have to challenge the same, as entitlement to the same has not been decided in Writ Petition No.132 of 2021. Another pertinent aspect that requires mention is that the applicant was 21-IA-17568-2022.doc Dixit granted building permission on 17th November 2018 to undertake the construction of a Masjid. This building permission itself has been challenged by the intervenor by filing an appeal under Section 47 of the Act of 1966 before the State Government. It is stated that even today, the said proceedings are pending. Thus, unless the applicant is armed with building permission that has become final, the question of implementation of an order granting police protection with a view to implement the order granting building permission to construct Masjid cannot be considered in an interim application filed in a disposed of writ petition. Thus, for aforesaid reasons, the Interim Application stands rejected. The applicant is at liberty to take such steps as are permissible in law for seeking redressal of its grievance. It is clarified that this Court has not examined the prayers made in the interim application on merits and the observations herein are only with a view to decide maintainability of the interim application. [ M.W. CHANDWANI, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ]

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 446 OF 2021 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3413 OF 2021 Siddharth Colony Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha and Ors. … Appellants V/s. The Municipal Corporation for Gr. Mumbai … Respondent Mr. Nilesh Pandey a/w Mr.Rahul Bhosale i/b. Equajuris for Appellants. Mr. Rajesh S. Patil a/w Smt. Madhuri More for Respondent-Corporation. CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 8th DECEMBER, 2021. P.C. : By an Order dated 25th June 2021, on the basis of statement made by the learned counsel for the Appellants that, the Appellants shall maintain status-quo and shall not carry out any further construction, this Court directed the Respondent Corporation not to take coercive action till next date of hearing. The present Appeal was thereafter adjourned from time to time for various reasons as has been recorded in earlier Orders. On 22nd November 2021, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondent – Corporation had made a grievance that, by taking undue advantage of ad-interim relief granted by this Court, the Appellants are carrying out construction on footpath abutting the suit property. In support of his contention, he relied on certain photographs annexed to the reply of Interim Application. The matter was thereafter adjourned on 30th November 2021, however, on that day, due to some reasons the present Appeal could not be listed on board. The Respondent-Corporation through their Advocate thereafter circulated the present praecipe dated 7th December 2021 seeking urgent hearing of the present Appeal. Learned counsel for the Respondent-Corporation again reiterated that, the Appellants by taking undue advantage of the Order dated 25th June 2021 are still carrying out construction on footpath attaching to the suit property. He drew my attention to the basic pleadings of the Appellants in the plaint of L.C. Suit (St.) No.4560 OF 2021 and in particular para No.10 thereof. It has been categoricaly pleaded by the Appellant that, the newly appointed developer started process of development activities at said plot of land and in order to redevelopment of the said plot of land the Plaintiffs/Appellants herein vacated the suit premises and handed it over to the Plaintiff No.1 for the purpose of site office as required to deal with occupants at large on site. It is further pleaded that, the Plaintiff No.1/Appellant No.1 herein has taken possession of the suit premises from its members being Plaintiff No.2 and 3 and Others. In this precise background, learned counsel for the Appellants had made a statement on 25th June 2021 and as noted earlier. Repeated grievances are made before this Court that by taking undue advantage of Order dated 25th June 2021, the Appellants are carrying out further construction on footpath. It is therefore necessary to direct the Assistant Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, M/W Ward, Mumbai to immediately visit the suit property today at 3.00 O'clock and inspect it. If it noticed that, the Appellants have carried out construction at the suit premises after 25th June 2021, to record a finding accordingly and submit a detailed report to this Court on next occasion i.e. on 17th December 2021. The present Order is passed in open Court in presence of learned counsel for the Appellants and learned counsel for the Respondent-Corporation. The Assistant Commissioner of Municipal Corporation therefore shall not wait for a copy of the present Order and shall inspect the suit premises today at 3.00 p.m. without giving any excuse. The Appellants are directed to maintain status-quo as of 12.00 noon of 8th December 2021. The Chairman of Appellant No.1 and Appellant Nos.2 and 3 along with their Advocate are permitted to remain present at the time of inspection by the Assistant Commissioner of Corporation, M/W Ward, Mumbai. The Senior Inspector of Police, Chembur Police Station is directed to provide necessary police protection to the Assistant Commissioner of Municipal Corporation, M/W Ward, Mumbai at the time of his inspection, to avoid any untoward incident or breach of law and order situation at the suit property. Stand over to 17th December 2021. [A.S. GADKARI, J.] MANOJ R TANDALE Digitally signed by MANOJ R TANDALE Date: 2021.12.08 14:19:06 +0530

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MOHAMMAD NAJEEB MOHAMMAD QAYYUM Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD NAJEEB MOHAMMAD Date: 2022.02.18 17:54:12 +0530 Appeal from Order No. 446 / 2021 Alongwith Interim Application No. 3413 / 2021 in Appeal from Order No. 446 / 2021 Siddharth Colony Vikas Seva Sang Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Through its Chief Promoter Mr. r. Waghmare and Ors. … Appellants Versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai … Respondent **** Mr. Nilesh R. Pandey i/by Equa Juris, Advocate for the Appellants. Mr. Rajesh Patil, Counsel for MCGM. Mr. Ravindra Sirsikar, Advocate for MCGM. **** CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J. DATE : 18th FEBRUARY, 2022. P.C. Appellants shall implead the Slum Rehabilitation Authority as a party Respondent. Amendment shall be carried out forthwith. Learned Counsel shall serve amended copy of the appeal on Counsel for the Corporation and also to the newly added Respondent. Stand over to 11th March, 2022. Ad-interim relief to continue till the next date. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 9: Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD NAJEEB MOHAMMAD OHAMMAD QAYYUM QAYYUM Date: 2022.03.11 18:38:02 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Appeal from Order No. 446 / 2021 Alongwith Interim Application No. 3413 / 2021 in Appeal from Order No. 446 / 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Chief Promoter. Mr. R. Waghmare ... Appellant Versus The Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai ... Respondent **** Mr. Nilesh R. Pandey i/by Equa Juris, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Rajesh Patil a/w Mr. Ravindra Sirsikar, Advocate for the MCGM/ Respondent No.1. Mr. Yogesh Patil i/by Mr. Vijay Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.2. CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J. DATE : $11^{th}$ MARCH, 2022. P.C. Mr. Patil waives on behalf of the Respondent No.2 – Slum Rehabilitation Authority. He seeks time to file reply. Time granted. Appellant may file the rejoinder/ reply before the returnable date. Stand over to 26th April, 2022. Interim relief if any, shall continue to operate till the next date. (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....APPELLANT V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 9907 OF 2022 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Lahu Bapu Kamble ....PETITIONER V/S Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3413 OF 2021 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. ....PETITIONER Mr.r. Waghmare V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN J DATE : 27th June, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 06/07/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....APPELLANT V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 9907 OF 2022 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Lahu Bapu Kamble ....PETITIONER V/S Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3413 OF 2021 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. ....PETITIONER Mr.r. Waghmare V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 19th October, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 16/11/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....APPELLANT V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 9907 OF 2022 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Lahu Bapu Kamble ....PETITIONER V/S Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. Mr.r. Waghmare ....RESPONDENT WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3413 OF 2021 In Appeal from Order 446 OF 2021 Siddharth Col. Vikas Seva Sangh Sahakari Grihanirman Santha Thr. Its Cheif Promoter. ....PETITIONER Mr.r. Waghmare V/S The Municipal Corporation Of Greater Mumbai ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. S. KARNIK J DATE : 16th November, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 15/12/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3702 OF 2019 Maha. Police Co-op. Housing Federation Ltd. .. Petitioner Versus Saraf Choudhari Nagar Co-op. Hsg. Soc. (No.2) Ltd. and Ors. .. Respondents WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30032 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30028 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30031 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30036 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30030 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30029 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30034 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30033 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 30035 OF 2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3702 OF 2019 Saraf Choudhari Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. .. Applicant In the matter between: Maharashtra Police Co-operative Housing Federation Limited .. Petitioner Versus Saraf Choudhari Nagar Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and Ors. .. Respondents .................... Mr. V.S.Kapse i/by Mr. N.S.Rajeshirke for Petitioner Mr. Mandar Limaye i/by Mr. S.S.Aradhye for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 Mr. S. H. Kankal, AGP for State Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 Mr. Vivek Walavalkar i/by Mr. Abhijeet Gosavi for Intervenor ................... CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : DECEMBER 12, 2022. P.C. : Heard learned Advocates for the respective parties. As informed to the Court, 10 out of the 14 Societies are ready for redevelopment. There are certain issues which are required to be looked into. The 4 reluctant Societies are now represented by Mr. Limaye and Mr. Aradhye (learned Advocates for Respondent Nos.1 to 4) before the Court. This Court had directed both Advocates to use their good officers to see if the said Societies bury their differences and participate in the redevelopment. Admittedly, the redevelopment is at the behest of Federation. One of the grievance mentioned by Mr. Limaye is effective representation of the 4 reluctant Societies in the Federation. Mr. Walawalkar and Mr. Kapse both inform the Court that in so far as effective representation is concerned and disclosure of any other issues to the said Societies are concerned, they are open to the same. In view of the above, this Court makes it clear that unless and until the 4 reluctant Societies point out perversity in the actions of the Petitioner, this Court will be reluctant to cancel the registration. This observation is however prima facie, and subject to hearing the objectors. At the joint request of all learned Advocates for respective parties, stand over to 16th December, 2022. In the meanwhile, adinterim relief, if any, granted earlier to continue. For the above reasons the 9 Interim Applications of the Societies for impleadment are allowed. Interim Application Nos. I.A.No. 30032 of 2022, I.A.No. 30028 of 2022, I.A.No.30031 of 2022, I.A.No. 30036 of 2022, I.A.No. 30030 of 2022, I.A.No. 30029 of 2022, I.A.No. 30034 of 2022, I.A.No. 30033 of 2022 and I.A.No. 30035 of 2022 are disposed of in terms of prayer clause (a) which is identical in all Applications and reads thus: "(a) Allow the Applicant to intervene in the present matter and be further pleased to direct the Petitioner to join the Applicant as a party respondent to the present writ petition," Necessary amendment to be carried out by tomorrow. Re-verification is dispensed with. Copy of the amended cause title shall be provided to the Respondents before the next date. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] SONALI SATISH KILAJE Digitally signed by SONALI 14:37:27 +0530

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 8486 OF 2024 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 241 OF 2007 Vyankatesh Barun Harijinas Reddy Since Deceased, through his legal representatives 1. Harijan Ananthamma w/o. Harijan Pedda Burranna and Ors. … Applicants IN THE MATTER OF : Union of India and Ors. … Appellants Versus Vyankatesh Barun Harijinas Reddy Since Deceased, through his legal representatives 1. Harijan Ananthamma w/o. Harijan Pedda ... Respondents Burranna and Ors. Mr. Sachin Punde, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. Y. S. Bhate, Advocate for Appellants. CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 6th MAY, 2024. P.C. : Learned counsel for the applicants on instructions, submits that he wants to withdraw this application. Considering his submission, application is allowed to be withdrawn. Dismissed and disposed of. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)

Order - Status 4: Megha 7_ia_1763_2023.doc MEGHA S PARAB Digitally signed by MEGHA S PARAB Date: 2023.05.04 16:41:31 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1763 OF 2023 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.1340 OF 2023 Ramesh Jamdade ...Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents ... Mr. Sadip Pareikh with Mr. Prabhakar Jadhav for the Applicant/Intervenor Mr. Ritesh Thobde with Mr. Sagar Tambe for the Applicant in ABA/1340/2023. Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM: SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : 4th MAY, 2023. P. C. :- Not on board. Upon being mentioned, taken on board. This is an application for intervention fled by the First Informant. Considering the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Learned counsel for the Applicant in Anticipatory Bail Application to implead the Intervenor as party Respondent and furnish copy of the anticipatory bail application to the learned counsel for the Intervenor on or before the next date of hearing. The application stands disposed of. (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Order - Status 3: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL (ST) NO.1323 OF 2024 Kadar Isak Khan @ Matanwala : Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. : Respondents Adv. Keshav Chanvan, for the Applicant. Mr. A. R. Patil, APP for the State. CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT, J. DATE : 9TH FEBRUARY, 2024 P.C. : Issue notice to Respondents, returnable on 1st March, 2024. Learned APP waives notice for Respondent No.1. Notice to Respondent No.2 to be served through the Concerned Investigating Officer/Police Station. (KISHORE C. SANT, J.)

Order - Status 5: Diksha Rane 8. IA 339-24.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339/2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL 161/2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Adv. Keshar Chavan for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 1, 2024. P.C. : 1. I am informed that the appellant is in custody for more than 8 years. The notice has already been issued to the victim by this Court. The service report is awaited. The Investigating Officer to inform the victim the next date of hearing and that she has a right to be represented by an advocate or through legal aid. 2. Stand over to 6/3/2024 , high on board. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 161 of 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA .. APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS Mr. Keshav Chavan, for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 6, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned APP who seeks time to take instructions whether next date of hearing is communicated to the complainant in terms of order dated 01/03/2024, stand over to 07/03/2024. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.161 OF 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Adv. Keshav Chavan for the applicant. Ms. Megha S. Bajoria, APP for the State. API Lamkhade, Shil Daighar Police Station. ------------ CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 7, 2024 P.C. : 1. Learned APP submits on instructions of the Investigating Officer that the victim though was not available at the residential address as she is presently in Uttar Pradesh, however telephonically the victim has intimated that she is in need of legal aid assistance. 2. Accordingly, Advocate Saakshat Relekar is requested to appear on behalf of the victim and assist this Court. 3. List the application on 11.03.2024 fairly high on board. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 11: Diksha Rane 19.ia.339-24.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.161 OF 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA ..APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. ..RESPONDENTS ------------ Adv. Keshav Chavan for the applicant. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. Adv. Saakshat Relekar for the respondent no.2 (appointed advocate). CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 11, 2024 P.C. : At the request of Mr. Saakshat Relekar, who has just been served with the copy of the appeal, stand over to 12/3/2024 . (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 14: Urmila Ingale 907-ia-339-24.doc 2024:BHC-AS:12137 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 339 OF 2024 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 161 OF 2024 KADAR ISAK KHAN @ MATANWALA APPLICANT VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR. RESPONDENTS Mr. Keshav Chavan, for the applicant. Mr.Saakshat Relekar, for respondent no.2. Mr. S. A. Karmakar, APP for the State. CORAM : M. S. KARNIK, J. DATE : MARCH 12, 2024 P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State. This is an interim application for bail in respect of the offence punishable under sections 376(2)(i), 506, 363 of the Indian Penal Code (hereafter 'IPC' for short) and under section 5(m) & 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereafter referred to as "POCSO Act") registered vide C.R. No. 19 of 2016 with Daighar Police Station. The interim application is opposed by learned APP and learned counsel who has been appointed by this Court to represent the complainant. The applicant is convicted for the offence punishable under sections 5(m) & 6 of the POCSO Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 14 years and fine of Rs.5,000/-. The applicant is convicted for other offences the sentence to which is to run concurrently. The applicant was arrested on 30/01/2016 and is now in custody for more than 8 years and 2 months. The applicant has undoubtedly been committed for a serious offence. The appeal has been admitted and will be heard finally in due course. The applicant has undergone custody for more than half of the sentence imposed by the trial Court up till now. Prior to the substitution of section 6 of POCSO Act with effect from 16/08/2019 substituted by Act 25 of 2019., the punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault was rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life and shall also be liable to fine. 2/5 Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 invited my attention to the findings recorded by the trial Court. It is submitted that on the basis of the evidence on record, for cogent reasons, the trial Court has rightly convicted the applicant for such a serious offence. It is therefore submitted that the applicant is not entitled for bail and instead of enlarging the applicant on bail, the appeal itself be heard finally. My attention is invited to the decision of the Supreme Court of India in State of U.P. Vs. Sonu Kushwaha 1 to contend that the trial Court has rightly held the accused guilty of offence of aggravated penetrative sexual assault punishable under section 6 of POCSO Act. My attention is also invited to the decision of the Supreme Court in 2 Nawabuddin Vs. State of Uttarakhand to submit that no leniency can be shown to an accused who has committed the offences under the POCSO Act and particularly when the same is proved by adequate evidence before a Court of law. These decisions will undoubtedly guide this Court when the appeal is finally heard on merits. It is not possible for me to hear the appeal finally at this 1 Criminal Appeal No. 1633 of 2023 dated 05/07/2023 2 Criminal Appeal No. 144 of 2022 dated 08/02/2022 stage considering the pendency of the old matters. The appeal is unlikely to be heard finally any time soon in the near future. Considering that the applicant is 70 years of age and has already undergone 8 years and 2 months of his substantive sentence, in my opinion, the applicant can be enlarged on bail. The applicant is not reported to have any criminal antecedents. Considering that the victim is residing in the same vicinity, on instructions, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant will reside outside Mumbai/ Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts. The statement is accepted. Hence, the following order :- O R D E R (a) The interim application is allowed. (b) The applicant-Kadar Isak Khan @ Matanwala in connection with C.R. No.19 of 2016 registered with Daighar Police Station shall be released on bail on his furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount. (c) The applicant is permitted to furnish cash bail surety in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- for a period of 6 weeks in lieu of surety. (d) The applicant shall report to the trial Court once in a year, on the first Monday of the concerned month between 11:00 a.m. and 1:00 p.m. commencing from April 2024. (e) The applicant shall not enter Mumbai/ Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts after being released on bail except for reporting to the trial Court. (f) The applicant shall inform the trial Court as well as the investigating officer the contact details as well as residential address while residing outside Mumbai/Mumbai Suburban and Thane districts. (g) The applicant shall remain present at the time of hearing of this appeal. The interim application is disposed of. I appreciate the valuable assistance rendered by Mr.Saakshat Relekar, the learned Advocate, who appeared on behalf of respondent No.2 at my request in this proceeding. His engagement be regularized by the Maharashtra State Legal Services Authority. (M. S. KARNIK, J.)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 8302 OF 2024 In Writ Petition STAMP NO. 95499 OF 2020 M/s Mantech Counting And Systems Llp ....PETITIONER V/S Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation And Ors ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN JAMDAR & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. M. SATHAYE, JJ DATE : 25th July, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned to 04/09/2024 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 7: 30-as-ia-8302-2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.8302 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION (ST) NO.95499 OF 2020 M/s. Mantech Counting and Systems LLP …Applicant / Petitioner Versus Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and ors …Respondents *** Mr. E.A. Sasi for the Applicant / Petitioner. Mr. K. S. Thorat, 'B' Panel Advocate for the Respondent No.4 - State *** CORAM: NITIN JAMDAR & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ. DATE : 6 SEPTEMBER 2024 P.C.: . Registry to examine the subject matter and place the Application before the appropriate bench as per roster. ( M.M. SATHAYE, J.) ( NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.8302 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION (L) NO.95499 OF 2020 M/s. Mantech Counting & Systems LLP .. Applicant Versus Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. E.A. Sasi a/w. Mr. Arnav Rane, Mr. Tejas Shinde & Mr. Bijoy Chacko, Advocates for the Applicant. Mr. A.I. Patel, Addl.G.P. a/w. Mr. Karan Thorat, B Panel for Respondent No.4-State. CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, JJ. DATE : NOVEMBER 19, 2024 P. C. The above Interim Application is filed seeking condonation of delay and to restore the above Writ Petition to file, which was dismissed pursuant to the Order passed by the Registrar (Judicial-I) for non-removal of office objections. Since the above Interim Application is coming up for the first time, the Registry is directed to issue notice to Respondent Nos.1 to 3, returnable on 17th December, 2024. In addition to the Court notice, the Applicant is permitted to serve the papers and proceedings of the above Interim Application, along with the above Writ Petition, and a copy of this Order, on Respondent Nos.1 to 3 by private notice as well. Mr. Patel, learned AGP waives notice on behalf of Respondent No.4. Stand over to 17 th December, 2024. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order. [SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.]

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 8302 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 95499 OF 2020 M/s. Mantech Counting & Systems LLP …Applicant/ Original Petitioner Versus Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation & Ors …Respondents Mr. E.A. Sasi, a/w Arnav Rane & Bijoy Chacko for the Applicant. Mr. A.I. Patel, Addl.GP, a/w K.S. Thorat B Panel, for Respondent No.4. None for Respondent No.1. CORAM : B. P. COLABAWALLA & SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, JJ. DATE : DECEMBER 17, 2024 PC : The above Interim Application is filed seeking a Condonation of Delay of approximately one year and nine months in filing the above Application and to set aside the order passed by the Registrar (Judicial-I) dated 16th June, 2022 under which the above Writ Petition was dismissed for non-removal of office objections. Page 1 of 3 December 17, 2024 Ashwini Vallakati The learned AGP appears on behalf of the State of Maharashtra (Respondent No.4). As far as Respondent Nos.1 to 3 are concerned, we find that they have been duly served by private notice (as directed by our order dated 19th November, 2024) and an affidavit of service (dated 9th December, 2024) to that effect is also filed. Despite service, none have appeared on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to 3. We have gone through the above Interim Application. Though we are not fully satisfied with the explanation given for the delay, in order to ensure that the Applicant/original Petitioner is not denied an opportunity of redressing their grievances on merits, we condone the delay and set aside the order passed by the Registrar (Judicial-I) dated 16th June, 2022 subject to the condition that the Applicant/original Petitioner pay cost of Rs.50,000/- to the Tata Memorial Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, within a period of two weeks from today and the receipt evidencing the payment of cost is submitted to the Registry of this Court which shall be kept in the file of the above matter. Once the costs are paid, the above Writ Petition shall be restored to the file and the office objections if any, shall also be removed by the Applicant/original Petitioner within a period of two weeks Page 2 of 3 December 17, 2024 Ashwini Vallakati thereafter. It is made clear that if the costs are not paid as stipulated in this order, the above Interim Application shall automatically stands dismissed without further reference to the Court. The Interim Application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order. [ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.] [ B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.]

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 8302 OF 2024 IN WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 95499 OF 2020 M/s Mantech Counting and Systems LLP Petitioner Versus Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation & Ors. Respondents Ms. Bhagyashri Mangale i/b E.A. Sasi for the Petitioner/Applicant. CORAM: B. P. COLABAWALLA & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ. DATE: JANUARY 3, 2025 P. C. Not on Board. At the request of the Applicant/Petitioner, taken on Board. The time to pay the cost of Rs. 50,000 to the Tata Memorial Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai (pursuant to the Order dated 17th December 2024) is extended by a period of one week from today. Page 1 of 2 JANUARY 3, 2025 3. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/ Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order. [FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.] [B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.]

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 562 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1784 OF 2023 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1783 OF 2023 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 562 OF 2023 Harishchandra Rampal Saroj @ Airport … Appellant Versus The State of Maharashtra and Anr. … Respondents ..... Ms. Veenu Dubey i/b Mr.Anil Dubey, for the Appellant/Applicant. Mr. A.R.Kapadnis, APP, for the Respondent-State. ….. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. DATED : 26th JULY, 2023. P.C. It appears from the police report submitted by the Senior Police Inspector, Pant Nagar Police Station to the learned APP that the concerned police personnel had only enquired with the landlord of the victim's parents about the whereabouts of the victim. It seems that there are no efforts made by the concerned police station to trace out and locate the whereabouts of victim and her parents. REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Digitally signed by REKHA PRAKASH PATIL Date: 2023.07.28 10:36:50 +0530 2 Learned APP seeks one more opportunity to trace and the location of the victim. 3 At his request, stand over to 9 th August, 2023. [PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]

Order - Status 5: Uday S. Jagtap IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 562 OF 2023 WITH I.A. NOS. 1784 OF 2023 & 1783 OF 2023 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 562 OF 2023 Harischandra Rampal Saroj @ Airport .. Appellant Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents ..... Ms. Veenu Dubey i/b Mr. Anil Dubey for the appellant Mr. Jai V. Kanade for the respondent no.2 – appointed Advocate Mr. A.R. Kapadnis, APP for the respondent – State ….. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. DATED : 30th AUGUST, 2023 P.C. . At the request of learned Counsel for respondent no.2, list on 13th September, 2023. (PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.)

Order - Status 6: Shailaja IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1783 OF 2023 a/w INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1784 OF 2023 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.562 OF 2023 ….. Harishchandra Rampal Saroj @ Airport ] Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another ] Respondents Ms. Veena Dubey i/b Mr. Anil Dubey, for Applicant. Ms. G.P. Mulekar, A.P.P, for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Jai V. Kanade, Appointed Advocate, for Respondent No.2. ….. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. DATE : 13th September, 2023. P.C. Heard. Reserved for orders. [PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]

Order - Status 8: Shailaja IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1784 OF 2023 IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.562 OF 2023 Harishchandra Rampal Saroj @ Airport ] Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another ] Respondents ….. Ms. Veenu Dubey i/b Mr. Anil Dubey, for Applicant. Ms. G.P. Mulekar, A.P.P, for Respondent No.1-State. Ms. Jai V. Kanade, Appointed Advocate for Respondent No.2. ….. CORAM : PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J. RESERVED ON : 13.09.2023 PRONOUNCED ON : 15.09.2023 ORDER: . In view of disposal of Interim Application No.1783 of 2023, this application stands disposed of. [PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.]

Order - Status 5: SALUNKE J V Digitally signed by SALUNKE J V Date: 2023.01.13 17:42:56 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 4 OF 2020 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 17167 OF 2022 Sunil Tukaram Jagtap } Petitioner Versus Sanjay Krishnarao Taksande } and Ors. } Respondents Ms. Radhali Kadam with Mr. S. S. Kulkarni for the petitioner. Mr. A. R. Gole for respondent no. 1. Mr. Hrishikesh Chavan for respondent no. 2. Mr. P. P. Kakade, Government Pleader with Mr. M. M. Pabale, AGP for State. Mr. Anil Sakhare, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kiran Gandhi i/b. Little and Co. for respondent no. 4. Mr. Aditya A. Joshi i/b. Mr. Abhijeet A. Joshi for respondents 5 and 6 (MSETCL). CORAM: S. V. GANGAPURWALA, Act.CJ.& SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE: JANUARY 13, 2023 P.C.: 1. The learned advocate for respondent no. 2 seeks time to file affidavit in reply to the interim application. The reply shall be filed within one week from today. 2. Place the matter on 1st February 2023. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 1

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.4 OF 2020 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.17167 OF 2022 IN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.4 OF 2020 Sunil Tukaram Jagtap ....Petitioner/Applicant V/S Sanjay Krishnarao Taksande & Ors. ....Respondents … Mr. Shriram S. Kulkarni for the Petitioner/Applicant. Mr. G.S. Godbole a/w Mr. A.R. Gole for Respondent No.1. Mr. Hrishikesh Chavan for Respondent No.2-MSEB. Mr. Anil Sakhare, Senior Advocate and Mr. Kiran Gavellkar i/b M/s. Little & Co. for Respondent No.4-MSEDCL. Mr. P.P. Kakade, GP a/w Mr. M.M. Pabale, AGP for Respondent Nos.3 and 7-State. … Mr. Abhijit Joshi for Respondent Nos.5 and 6-MSETCL. CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA, ACJ & SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATE : 1st FEBRUARY 2023. P.C.: 1 We have heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioner/Applicant and the learned Advocates for the respective Respondents. 2 The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has filed Interim Application for amendment in view of the subsequent development. He submits that the Petitioner had challenged the appointment of Respondent No.1 initially with Respondent No.5. The tenure of Respondent No.1 with Respondent No.5 is over. Fresh selection process was conducted by Respondent No.4 in which Respondent No.1 is selected as Director (Operations). The same is also against the rules. The rules require that a person with impeccable past history can be considered. The Respondent No.1 does not fit into it. 3 The learned Advocate for the Respondent submits that the fresh appointment is by another employer, the cause of action of the Writ Petition now does not subsist. In view of that in a Writ Petition, for which the cause of action does subsist, amendment may not be allowed. 4 It is not disputed by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner that when the PIL was filed Petitioner was seeking writ of quo warranto qua appointment of Respondent No.1 by Respondent No.5. The tenure of Respondent No.1 with Respondent No.5 is over. Respondent No.4 conducted fresh selection process and has selected Respondent No.1 as Director (Operations). The same would be a completely fresh cause of action as the employer and the designation has changed. 5 In light of above, as the relief in the original Writ Petition itself has become infructuous, it would be improper to consider the present 2/3 Application for amendment. It is for the Petitioner to take appropriate steps by filing proceedings as may be maintainable. 6 In light of above, the PIL and Interim Application stands disposed of. The Petitioner may take proceedings as may be permissible under law. In that event all contentions of the Petitioner as well as respective Respondents are kept open. No costs. (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM Digitally signed by SUDARSHAN RAJALINGAM KATKAM Date: 2023.02.04 10:27:34 +0530