← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/5134/2019disposed off

Mr. Tanveer Isa Khadpolkar v. M/S. Krishna Antioxidants Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Director And ORS.

2024-09-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice K.R. Shriram,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain2 pages

TAUSEEF LAIQUEE FAROOQUI Tauseef 1/2 14-WP.5134.2019.doc TAUSEEF LAIQUEE FAROOQUI Date: 2024.09.09 10:04:35 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5134 OF 2019 Tanveer Isa Khadpolkar

...Petitioner

Versus

Krishna Antioxidants Pvt. Ltd.

Through its Director & Ors.

...Respondents

__________ Mr. Anand Pai a/w. Mr. Sachin Mhatre and Adv. Udi Gupta and Mr. Sahil Sayyed for Petitioner.

Mr. Shraddha Dube Patil i/b. M/s. Jay & Co. for Respondent Nos.4, 5, 7, 8 and 10.

Mr. Jitendra Jagtap for Respondent No.13 (MPCB). Mr. Asif I. Patel, Addl. G. P. a/w. Mr. M. M. Pabale, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3, 9 and 11-State.

Mr. Sandesh Shukla a/w. Ms. Anasamah Sayed i/b. M/s. Abhay Navaji & Associates for Respondent No.1.

__________ CORAM : K.R. SHRIRAM & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.

DATED : 5th SEPTEMBER 2024 P.C. :

1.

After the petition was heard and considering the nature of the dispute, we pass the following order by consent:- (i) Respondent No.5-Regional Officer of MIDC shall consider representation to be filed by Petitioner. Mr. Pai states the petition that is filed, copy whereof has already been served on MIDC be treated as the representation of Petitioner. Ordered accordingly.

(ii) Regional Officer of MIDC shall consider the representation

Tauseef 2/2 14-WP.5134.2019.doc and take such actions as required to be taken in accordance with law, after giving personal hearing to Petitioner and Respondent No.1.

(iii) The affidavit-in-reply filed by Respondent No.1 shall be treated as a response to the representation by Petitioner. (iv) Should either of the parties, i.e., Petitioner or Respondent No.1 wish to file any further representation/response/ submissions, they may do so on or before 30th September 2024.

(v) This is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of MIDC under the lease deed entered into with Respondent No.1.

(vi) Regional Officer of MIDC will pass speaking order on or before 15th December 2024.

2.

We clarify that we have not made any observation on the merits of the complaints lodged by Petitioner and the response filed by Respondent No1.

3.

All rights and contentions of the parties are kept open. 4.

Petition dismissed.

(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (K.R. SHRIRAM, J.)