Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AURANGABAD BENCH
VIBHA KANKANWADI, HITEN S.VENEGAVKAR
Santosh S/o Sudam Bhalerao – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
1. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the decisions taken in the meetings of the Minor Modification Committee (MMC) on 21.09.2023 and the Land Allotment Committee (LAC) of MIDC on 25.09.2023, whereby open spaces bearing Nos. 8 and 15 in the Chikalthana MIDC Industrial Area, Aurangabad, came to be allotted to respondent Nos. 7 to 9. The petitioner seeks quashing of these decisions and also direction to the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (“MIDC”) to allot the very same open spaces to him.
It must be stated at the outset that the applications for allotment of the subject lands were submitted not by the present petitioner in his individual capacity, but by a partnership firm operating under the name and style of M/s. Shri Pratiksha Industries. The present writ petition, however, has not been instituted by the said firm; instead, it has been filed by the petitioner in his personal capacity. The petition is conspicuously silent on whether the partnership firm is duly registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, and whether the firm or its p
The court affirmed the constitutional validity of the MIDC's priority allotment policy, emphasizing that online applications and fair process must apply uniformly, without arbitrary distinctions amon....
Process of applying the pick and choose policy and making allotments at the whims and fancies of the persons in power continued in the State.
The decision to allot a specific plot for installation of an oxygen manufacturing plant depended on the Land Committee as per the MIDC regulations, and the MIDC's disregard of its own regulations and....
The State must ensure fair and transparent policies in public property dealings, adhering to constitutional mandates, while judicial review of policy decisions is limited to cases of arbitrariness or....
The court upheld the government's policy for land allotment to promote the film industry, emphasizing compliance with Article 14 and the importance of transparency in public contracts.
The government must act in a fair and just manner in the distribution of wealth, and any arbitrary distribution would violate the law of the land.
Writ petitions can be maintained against administrative actions affecting contracts, especially when principles of natural justice and public policy are at stake.
The court affirmed that statutory bodies must fulfill their obligations and that government directions must be lawful and reasonable, subject to judicial review.
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
