M/S. Agrawal Foodstuff Llp Thr. Auhorisec Nikhil Radhesham Agarwal v. The Stte Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6157 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION NO.6159 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION NO.6173 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION NO.6174 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION NO.6175 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION NO.6154 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION NO.6160 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION NO.6158 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION NO.6153 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION NO.6152 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.5690 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.5857 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.5865 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.5866 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.5874 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.5875 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.5879 OF 2023 WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.5880 OF 2023 Agrawal Foodstuff LLP ] .. Petitioner Bhagawati Agro Systems Pvt. Ltd.

] .. Petitioner Bhagwati Cotex Pvt. Ltd.

] .. Petitioner Bhagwati Cotex Pvt. Ltd.

] .. Petitioner Sarvambh Agro Industries LLP ] .. Petitioner Janish Pharma LLP ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Agro Industries ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Agro Industries ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Traders ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Traders ] .. Petitioner Sidhipriya Buidcorp LLP ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Agro Industries ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Food Processors ] .. Petitioner 1/3

Siddhivinayak Food Processors ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Food Processors ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Manufacturing ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Manufacturing ] .. Petitioner Siddhivinayak Electronics ] .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The State of Maharashtra ]

2. The Divisional Commissioner, ] (Konkan Division), Mumbai ] .. Respondents Mr. Onam V. Hingorani for the Petitioner/s in all the Petitions. Ms. A.A. Purav, AGP for the Respondents-State. CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ DATE : 24 TH AUGUST, 2023.

ORAL JUDGMENT : { Per Sunil B. Shukre, J. } 1.

All these petitions are not on board today. Considering the fact that the issue involved in Writ Petition No.4400 of 2023 and the issue involved in all these petitions, both, are similar, all these petitions are taken on production board.

2.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally, by consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

3.

We find that the prayers made by the petitioners are reasonable and, therefore, appropriate direction would have to be deservedly issued to 2/3

respondent no.2. Respondent no.2 is directed to finally decide the claims of the petitioners in accordance with law, at the earliest, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of writ of this court, if not already decided. 4.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms. All the petitions are disposed of. [ FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J. ] [ SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J. ] 3/3