Bombay High CourtPILWP/3/2024dismissed

Dhirendra Phadte And 4 ORS v. Tarun Radhakrishin Tahilani And 8 ORS

2025-03-10Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Bharati Dangre , Hon'Ble Ms Justice Nivedita P. Mehta3 pages

Amrut

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA

MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.666 OF 2025 (F) WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION WP NO.3 OF 2024 MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.666 OF 2025 (F) DHIRENDRA PHADTE AND 4 ORS ... APPLICANTS

Versus

TARUN RADHAKRISHIN TAHILANI AND 8 ORS ... RESPONDENTS WITH PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION WP NO.3 OF 2024 DHIRENDRA PHADTE AND 4 ORS ... PETITIONERS

Versus

TARUN RADHAKRISHIN TAHILANI AND 8 ORS ... RESPONDENTS Mr Richard Almeida, Advocate for the applicants. Mr Nitin Sardessai, Senior Advocate with Mr Raunaq Rao, Advocate for respondent No.1 in PILWP No.3 of 2024 and for respondent No.5 in PILWP No.4 of 2024.

Mr Prashil Arolkar, Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 4, 6, 7 and 9 in PILWP No.3 of 2024. Ms Maria Correia, Additional Government Advocate for respondent No.8 in PILWP No.3 of 2024.

Mr Prayash Shirodkar, Advocate for respondent No.5 in PILWP No.3 of 2024 and for respondent No.4 in PILWP No.4 of 2024. Mr Yogesh Nadkarni and Mr Nilay Naik, Advocates for the petitioners in PILWP No.4 of 2024.

Mr Pravin Faldessai, Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 3 in PILWP No.4 of 2024.

CORAM:- M. S. KARNIK & NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.

DATED :- 10th March, 2025 P.C.:

Heard learned counsel for the applicants.

2. This application for amendment has been seriously opposed by learned Senior Advocate Mr Sardessai for respondent No.1 in PILWP No.3 of 2024 and respondent No.5 in PILWP No.4 of 2024.

3. Mr Sardessai submits that if the amendment application is allowed, it will cause great prejudice to respondent No.1 as the amendment will change the nature of the petition. It is further submitted that there is a remedy of appeal available against the order dated 10.01.2025 passed by respondent No.4. Mr Almedia, learned counsel for the applicants submits that there is no remedy of appeal available against the order dated 10.01.2025 passed by respondent No.4. We are of the opinion that there should be no difficulty in allowing the amendment application as the petition is at pre-admission stage. Respondents will have an opportunity to file their reply. We are therefore inclined to permit the applicants to amend the petition within a period of two days from today. Reply, if any, to the amendment application be filed within a period of one week from the date of the amendment. The application is disposed of.

4. List the petitions on the supplementary board of 26.03.2025. NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J.

M. S. KARNIK, J.

Signed by: AMRUT NAGESH TARI Designation: Personal Assistant Date: 12/03/2025 09:59:56