Santosh Baburao Taro v. Sangita Sanjay Shinde And ORS

( 1 ) ca656.19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.656 OF 2019 IN WP/415/2019 SANTOSH BABURAO TARO

VERSUS

SANGITA SANJAY SHINDE AND ORS Mr.Atul M. Karad, Advocate for the applicant Mr.V.S.Badakh, AGP for the respondent/State CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.

DATED :

11.01.2019 P.C. :- .

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

2.

By the present application, the applicant prays for intervention in the writ petition No.415 of 2019.

3.

The first submission of the learned counsel is that the applicant is having no locus to approach this Court seeking challenge to a license validly granted by following due procedure of law and secondly there is also a resolution passed by the Gramsabha permitting the license holder whose license is shifted from one place to another place

( 2 ) ca656.19 and premise of the applicant intervenor is higher by the license holder for running his business and if the order passed in the petition the interest of the applicant would be affected.

4.

Heard learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 4 (the petitioners in writ petition No.415/2019) and learned AGP for the respondent/State. None for respondent No.8.

5.

In view of the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and for the reasons stated in the application, the application is allowed in terms of prayer clause-B and disposed of.

[S.M.GAVHANE,J.] [PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.] VishalK/ca656.19