Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
POPAT BABURAO SODNAR AND OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioners.
2. Perused the papers on record.
3. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 30th January, 2025 . Learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of Respondent No. 1/State.
The court emphasized procedural compliance in issuing notice to respondents in a legal matter.
The Chief Ministerial Officer lacks authority to issue judicial notices; valid service requires proper documentation to invoke presumptions under the General Clauses Act.
Timely filing of affidavit in reply is crucial in the court proceedings.
A representative's acceptance of notice nullifies the need for formal notice issuance in a writ petition.
Timely service of notice is essential in civil proceedings, with the court granting a 7 days extension to the appellants for compliance.
The court emphasizes the necessity of proper service of notice to all respondents to ensure effective judicial proceedings.
The court may condone a short delay in filing an appeal if justified, emphasizing the necessity for expedient legal processes.
The Court emphasized the importance of providing show cause notices before termination and the right of employees to respond to internal inquiry reports.
Courts can order interim protection to ensure the safety and security of petitioners pending the filing of a reply by the respondents.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
