Maharashtra State Industrial Development Corporation, Amravati Through Its Manager v. State Of Maharashtra Through Its Collector, Amravati And Others

1 CAO 169.20

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Civil Application (O) No.169/2020 in M..A. (St) No.25114/2019 In R.C. No.270/19 In First Appeal St No.27963/2017 (Maharashtra State Industrial Development Corporation, Amravati V State of Maharashtra and others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court'

s or Judge'

s orders appearances, Court'

s orders of directions and Registrar'

s orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------------- Shri R. Masurkar, Adv h/f Shri A.C. Jaltare, Adv for applicant. Shri R. Shinde, Adv for resp. nos. 3 to 5.

Shri Dubey, AGP for State.

CORAM : S.M. MODAK, J.

DATE : 27-10-2020.

Hearing was conducted through video conferencing and the learned counsel agreed that the audio and visual quality was proper.

Heard learned Advocate Shri Masurkar holding for Shri Jaltare, Advocate for the applicant, Shri Shinde, Advocate for respondent nos. 3 to 5 and learned AGP Shri Dubey for the State. The applicant is permitted to supply the copies for service. Learned Advocate Shri Shinde submitted that he has already filed power for respondent nos. 3 to 5. Office is directed to show his name on the Board in future. In view of that there is no need to issue notices to respondent nos. 3 to 5. In spite of the order passed by this Court on 06-12-2018 thereby restoring the appeals still the applicant has not removed the office objection. Accordingly, the learned Registrar was pleased to dismiss the appeal as per order dated 04-02-2019. Now the appellant/applicant undertakes to remove the office objection within the period of 8 weeks. Respondent nos. 3 to 5

2 CAO 169.20 are not seriously objecting.

There is delay in filing an application for restoration. It needs to be condoned. Hence, the order :-

O R D E R

(a) Delay caused in filing restoration application is condoned. (b) Appeal St.No.27963/2017 is restored.

(c) Both applications are disposed of.

(d) The applicant is given 8 weeks time to remove the office objection.

(e) If the office objections are not removed within that period the applicant to pay costs of Rs. 5000/- to the High Court Library, Nagpur.

The order be communicated to the counsel appearing for the parties, either on the e-mail address or on WhatsApp or by such other mode, as is permissible in law.

(S.M. Modak, J.) Deshmukh