← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/1549/2016disposed off

Sunil Darekar, Proprietor Gargi Outdoor Advertising v. Union Of India, Through The Ministry Of Defense And ANR.

2016-06-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice S.C. Dharmadhikari,Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Dr. Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi2 pages

908-WPL.1353.2016.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1353 OF 2016 Sunil Darekar, Proprietor } Gargi Outdoor Advertising } Petitioner versus Union of India and Ors.

} Respondents Mr. Saket Mone with Mr. Vishesh Kalra and Mr. Sabit Chakrabarti i/b. M/s. Vidhi Partners.

Mr. Bharat H. Mehta for respondent nos.

1 and 2.

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ.

DATED :- JUNE 23, 2016 P.C. :- The impugned order directs the petitioner to vacate a land styled as defence land within a period of 15 days from the date of its publication. That is dated 8th April, 2016. Apprehending such eviction, this petition was filed and by an adinterim order, the petitioner's hoarding/advertisement displayed thereon has been protected. The ad-interim order passed on 12th May, 2015 is thus continued. On the last occasion, Mr. Mehta sought time to take instructions from the Ministry officials, particularly as to whether they would go ahead with the action in terms of the impugned order or otherwise.

J.V.Salunke,PA

908-WPL.1353.2016.doc 2) Today, when the matter is called out Mr.Mehta, on instructions, states that the impugned notice/order dated 8th April, 2016 stands withdrawn and the authorities would now take further steps in accordance with law in order to secure the eviction/vacation of the petitioner's hoarding/advertisement displayed thereon. In view of this statement made, all apprehensions of the petitioner have been taken care of. The Statement made by Mr. Mehta is accepted as an undertaking given to this court. In view thereof, nothing survives in the writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of by clarifying that the court has not examined either the ambit and scope of the legal provision or the merits of the rival contentions. We reserve liberty to the respondents to take steps in accordance with law. (DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.) J.V.Salunke,PA