Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The State Of Maharashtra vs Mukta Arts Ltd. . on 22 September, 2014
Bench: H.L. Dattu, S.A. Bobde, Abhay Manohar Sapre
1
ITEM NO.32 & 57 COURT NO.2 SECTION IX
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.24205-24206/2014
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated
30/07/2014 in RPL No. 40/2012 in WP No. 1826/2003 and Civil
application no. 104 of 2014 in PIL No. 219 of 2009 passed by
the High Court Of Bombay)
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
MUKTA ARTS LTD. AND ORS. Respondent(s)
(with appln. (s) for exemption from filing c/c of the impugned
judgment and interim relief and office report)
WITH
SLP(C) Nos. 25749-25751 of 2014
(With appln. for deletion of the name of respondent and
exemption from filing c/c of the impugned judgment and
permission to place addl. documents on record and interim
relief and office report)
Date : 22/09/2014 These petitions were called on
for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.L. DATTU
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Darius Khambatta, Adv. General
Ms. Madhavi Diwan, Adv.
Mr. Krishna Kedia, Adv.
Mr. Aniruddha P. Mayee,Adv.
Mr. Dushyant Dave, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Vinay navare, Adv.
Mr. Satyajeet Kufmr, Adv.
Mr. Keshav Ranjan, Adv.
Ms. Abha R Sharma, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
For Respondent(s)
Digitally signed by
Mr. H.N. Salve, Sr. Adv.
Charanjeet Kaur
Date: 2014.09.25
11:35:25 IST
Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr. Adv.
Reason:
Mr. Santosh Paul, Adv.
Mr. Ravi Rodricks, Adv.
Mr. Kamlesh Kharde, Adv.
Mr. Arvind Gupta, Adv.
2
Mr. Debopriyo, Adv.
Ms. Pooja Singh, Adv.
Ms. Arti Singh,Adv.
Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, Sr.Adv.
Mr. Navin Prakash,Adv.
Mr. Ravi Rodrigues, Adv.
Mr. Kamlesh Kharde, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Shri Darius Khambatta, learned Advocate General, appearing for the State of Maharashtra, very fairly submits that he has raised issues with regard to the maintainability of the Review Petition before the High Court. One of the issues was that after this Court rejected the special leave petition(s) filed by the review petitioner(s), the High Court ought not to have entertained the review petition(s).
The High Court while considering the aforesaid issue, has observed that since there was conflicting views, this Court has referred the matters to a larger Bench for decision.
In our opinion, that issue should be kept open for the State of Maharashtra and the Maharashtra Film Stage & Cultural Development Corporation (for short, "the Corporation")to be agitated before this Court on a later date.
With this modification and clarification we reject the special leave petitions.
However, we grant liberty to the State of Maharashtra and the Corporation to make an 3 appropriate application before the High Court to hear and dispose of the Review Petition(s) as early as possible.
We make it clear that if and when such application(s) is filed, the High Court will consider the same in accordance with law.
Ordered accordingly.
[ Charanjeet Kaur ] [ Vinod Kulvi ] Court Master Asstt. Registrar