Hindustan Unilevr Limited v. State Of Maharashtra

WPL.3019.2015.911.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 3019 OF 2015 Hindustan Unilever Limited } Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra } Respondent Mr. Virag Tulzapurkar - Senior Advocate with Ms. Shoma Maitra i/b. M/s. Wadia Ghandy and Co. for the Petitioner.

Ms. Geeta Shastri-AGP for the Respondent.

CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & B. P. COLABAWALLA, JJ.

DATED :- NOVEMBER 18, 2015 P.C. :- The Petitioner's request and as set out in the Petition in great details has not been considered till date. The Petitioner states that it proposes to enter into a business conducting arrangement. That would involve transfer of benefits of occupancy. For that, under clause 5 of the occupancy agreement, the Petitioner would require prior written sanction of the Government of Maharashtra and before such business conducting arrangement is finalised. The Petitioner has made a written request for such sanction. That is not considered till date. This inaction has led the Petitioner to approach this Court. J.V.Salunke,PA

WPL.3019.2015.911.doc 2) We have heard Mr. Tulzapurkar, learned; Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Ms. Shastri, learned AGP for the State. 3) The Writ Petition can be conveniently disposed of with a direction to the Respondent to consider the request made by the Petitioner in writing, as expeditiously as possible and within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. We clarify that beyond this direction, we have not adjudicated on the rival contentions nor have we expressed any opinion on the legality and validity of the clause of the agreement. All contentions of both sides in relation thereto are kept open. The Writ Petition is disposed of. (B.P.COLABAWALLA, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.) J.V.Salunke,PA