Procam International Limited v. The State Of Maharashtra And 2 Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO.629 OF 2017 Procam International Limited

...Petitioner

vs.

The State of Maharashtra and Others

...Respondents

Mr. Vineet Naik, Senior Advocate a/w. Ms. Bindi Dave and Mr. Raghav Gupte i/b. Wadia Ghandy & Co., for the Petitioner. Mr. Anil Sakhare, Senior Advocate a/w. Joel Carlos with Ms. Pooja Yadav, for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3.

Mr. Dushant Kumar, AGP for Respondent No. 1- State. CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & PRAKASH D. NAIK, JJ.

DATE :

MARCH 02, 2017 P.C.:

.

The apprehension expressed by the Petitioner in this Petition is that on the basis of the impugned communications dated 12th January, 2017 (Exhibit "A") and dated 1st February, 2017 (Exhibit "A-1"), the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 may take coercive steps against the Petitioner for recovery of the amount.

2.

According to the learned counsel for the Petitioner against the aforesaid demand, the Petitioner had already submitted a representation before Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and the matter has 1/3

been heard and is reserved for order. In the circumstances, till the matter is finally decided by the Competent Authority, it is not open for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to take any coercive steps for recovery of the said amount.

3.

The learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 has stated that unless the Petitioner's grievance in regard to the impugned notices (Exhibit "A" and "A-1") is decided by a speaking order, no coercive steps will be taken against the Petitioner. Recording the aforesaid statement made by the learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 we dispose of this Petition.

4.

We also record the statement made by the learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 that the Committee before whom the Petitioner's application for "P1- Powerboat -Indian Grand Prix of the Seas event" is filed, shall not reject the application of the Petitioner on the ground that the Petitioner has not paid the amount mentioned in notices(Exhibit "A" and "A-1").

5.

We however make it clear that "not to take any coercive 2/3

steps" shall mean that on the basis of the monetary demand raised in Exhibits "A" and "A-1".

6.

The Petition stands disposed of as such.

7.

The parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.) 3/3