Maahesh M. Lalchandani v. State Of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary And ORS.

SWAROOP SHARAD PHADKE SWAROOP SHARAD PHADKE Date: 2021.07.27 19:47:23 +0530 8.as.wp.3222.21.doc S.S.Kilaje

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3222 OF 2021 Mahesh M. Lalchandani ..Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary, Government of Maharashtra and Ors.

..Respondents ...................

 Mr. Manoj Harit i/by Manoj Harit & Co. for the Petitioner  Mr. P.P.Kakade, Government Pleader a/w. Mr. S.B.Kalel, AGP for the State  Mr. Girish S. Godbole i/by Mr. Sumit S. Kothari and Mr. Aditya P. Shirke for Respondent No.6 ...................

CORAM : S. J. KATHAWALLA & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : JULY 27, 2021.

(Through Video Conferencing) P.C.:

[ .

By the above Writ Petition, the Petitioner inter alia seeks the following reliefs :

"b.

This Hon'

ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ or an order / direction in the nature of writ thereby directing the Respondent No.2 and other Respondent Authorities to take cognizance, to examine the issues raised in the representation / Complaint dated 7/9/2020, so also, the present petition ;

c.

Further direction to initiate appropriate lawful remedial measures, if necessary, as expeditiously as possible, or, within a time bout manner as this Hon'

ble Court may deem fit and proper ;

d.

Any further order/ direction as this Hon'

ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances set out in the petition to meet the interests of justice, fairness, transparency, accountability and probity." 2.

Mr. Godbole, learned Advocate appearing for Respondent No.6 states that the representation dated 7th September, 2020 filed by the Petitioner is nothing but a consequence of the existing rivalry between

8.as.wp.3222.21.doc the Petitioner and the partner of Respondent No.6 who are real brothers. He states that the Petitioner has no locus to file the present petition and in any event the Petitioner has in the present Petition suppressed several relevant facts.

3.

Be that as it may, we direct Respondent No.2 to hear all the concerned parties, consider their written submissions and dispose of the representation dated 7th September, 2020 filed by the Petitioner within a period of four weeks from today.

4.

The Petitioner may amongst others, reiterate the above submissions before the Respondent No.2, who shall pass appropriate orders on the same.

5.

All contentions of the parties are kept open. 6.

We have not gone into the merits of the allegations or counter allegations made by the parties against each other and therefore, this order should not be construed as an order passed on merits or that we have granted any other relief to the Petitioner save and except a hearing before the Respondent No.2 7.

The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ S. J. KATHAWALLA, J. ]