← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/1527/2020dismissedrule discharged

Jaihind Majur Kamgar Cooperative Society Ltd., Through Its President, Digras And 3 v. State Of Maharashtra, Through Its Directorate Of Municipal Administration, Mumbai And 2 Others

2020-03-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sunil B. Shukre,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Avinash G. Gharote2 pages

1803wp1527.20 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.1527 OF 2020 (Jaihind Majur Kamgar Cooperative Society Ltd. and others vs. State of Maharashtra and others) ________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders Court'

s or Judge'

s orders or directions and Registrar'

s orders.

Shri V.N. Patre, Advocate for petitioners.

Shri S.Y. Deopujari, Government Pleader for respondent nos.1 and 2.

-------- CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

DATED : MARCH 18, 2020 Heard Shri Patre, learned Counsel for petitioners and Shri Deopujari, learned Government Pleader for respondent nos.1 and 2.

2) It appears to us that the four petitioners, who have submitted individually and separately tender forms, now have joined hands to file this petition commonly. In fact, for each of the petitioners, there is a separate cause of action although the cause of action, which has made these petitioners file this petition, may be common to all of them. However, the fact is that the cause of action for each of the petitioners is separate and, therefore, it is quite likely that the response of the respondents to the cause of action espoused by all

1803wp1527.20 2/2 the petitioners could also be different. Therefore, this petition suffers from misjoinder of parties and cannot be entertained in its present form.

3) Secondly, the petition is also incomplete as tender document along with all its annexures and prescribed forms has not been filed and there is also no pleading regarding particular format prescribed for submission of economic eligibility certificate. It, therefore, cannot be ascertained whether or not the economic eligibility certificate stated to be submitted by each of the petitioners was in the prescribed format. On this ground also, this petition cannot be entertained.

4) The petition stands dismissed with liberty to each of the petitioners to file separate petitions with complete pleadings. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE khj