← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/4336/2011dissmiss for defaultnonprosecution

Shankar Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha v. Shri Harshavardhan Patil, Hon'Ble Minister For Cooperation And ORS

2016-07-14Hon'Ble Shri Justice M.S. Sonak2 pages

skc 903-WP-4336-11

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4336 OF 2011 Shankar Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha ..

Petitioner vs.

Shri Harshavardhan Patil, the Hon'ble Minister & Ors.

..

Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4332 OF 2011 Nimsakhar Vividh Karyakari Seva Sahakari Sanstha & Anr.

..

Petitioners vs.

Shri Harshavardhan Patil, the Hon'ble Minister & Ors.

..

Respondents Mr. S. S. Patwardhan with Mr. B. R. Mandlik for Petitioners. None for Respondents.

CORAM : M. S. SONAK, J.

DATE: 14 JULY 2016 P.C :

1] On 7 December 2015, this court made the following order: "1] These petitions are already dismissed as against Respondent No.5, who is contesting Respondent. Mr. Patwardhan, learned counsel for the Petitioners, seeks some time to take steps for restoration.

2] Accordingly, place these matters for further consideration on 2 February 2016 on the supplementary board. If by that date, no steps are taken, then these petitions shall be dismissed for non-prosecution, as there is no point in proceeding with these petitions, in absence of contesting Respondent."

1/2

skc 903-WP-4336-11 2] Today, learned counsel for the petitioners states that they have made several attempts to contact the petitioners so as to able to take steps to serve the unserved respondents as also, to apply for restoration of these petitions as against respondent no. 5 who was the contesting respondent. Learned counsel states that despite such efforts, there is no response from the petitioners. 3] As noted earlier, the petitions are already dismissed as against respondent no. 5 who is the contesting respondent. Till date despite opportunities, the petitions have not been restored against the contesting respondent, since the petitioners have chosen not to even apply for such restoration.

4] Taking into consideration the aforesaid circumstances, these petitions are dismissed for non prosecution.

(M. S. SONAK, J.) Chandka 2/2