← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/6808/2025disposed off

Ms Om Maa Padmavati Hotel Chief Promoter Swapnil Shantilal Duggad v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Industrial Secretary And Others

2025-08-25Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manish Pitale,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Y. G. Khobragade2 pages

2025:BHC-AUG:23176-DB 21-WP-6808-25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6808 OF 2025 MS OM MAA PADMAVATI HOTEL CHIEF PROMOTER SWAPNIL SHANTILAL DUGGAD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH INDUSTRIAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS ...

Mr. V. M. Kagne, A.G.P. for Respondents Mr. Shrirang S. Dande, Advocate for Respondent No.4 ...

CORAM : MANISH PITALE AND Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

DATE : 25.08.2025 PER COURT :

1.

None appeared for the petitioner on 29.07.2025. 2.

This Court had passed the following order;

"1. A request is made for adjournment on the ground of medical emergency of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

2. The contesting respondent, i.e., the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC), is represented by Mr. Dande, learned counsel. He informs this Court that earlier this plot was allotted to the petitioner in terms of order dated 05.01.2016. However, since the petitioner failed to satisfy the terms and conditions in respect of allotment of the said plot, such allotment was cancelled and thereafter, by process of auction the plot came to be rrd 1/2

21-WP-6808-25 allotted to respondent No. 5. It is submitted that, in such circumstances, there is absolutely no substance in the present petition, and it deserves to be dismissed. 3.

We expect the learned counsel for the petitioner to respond to the said stand of the MIDC on the next date of listing.

4.

List the matter on 11.08.2025 in the same category."

3.

As noted here-in-above, there is no appearance on behalf of petitioner, which demonstrates that the petitioner is not serious in prosecuting the petition.

4.

Hence, dismissed for want of prosecution.

(Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.) rrd 2/2