Supreme Court - Daily Orders
The State Of Maharashtra vs Babaso on 5 May, 2025
Author: Sanjay Karol
Bench: Sanjay Karol
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025
(Arising out of SLP (C)No. 4409 OF 2022)
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ......APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
BABASO AND ANR. ......RESPONDENT(S)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant lays challenge to the impugned judgment dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.3595 of 2021 titled "Babaso vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.” passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 01.03.1996 in Writ Petition No.1993 of 1994 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay titled "Shri Baba Sahab Mallappa Koli vs. The Chairman, the Committee for Security and Verification of Tribal Claims.” having attained finality, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI Signatureth 5 MAY,2025 Not Verified Digitally signed by NAVEEN D Date: 2025.05.30 15:18:41 IST Reason: IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C)No.5841 OF 2022) THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER @ APPOINTING AUTHORITY AND ANR. ........APPELLANT(S) VERSUS RAM YASHWANTA KOLI AND ANR. .......RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment dated 22.09.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Writ Petition No. 6250 of 2020 titled “Ram Yashwanta Koli Vs. The State of Mahrashtra & Ors.”
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
………………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI 5TH MAY,2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C)No.19696 OF 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ......APPELLANT(S) VERSUS VIJAY & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant lays challenge to the impugned judgment dated 04.05.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad in Writ Petition No. 8178 of 2020 titled "Vijay vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.”
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 21.09.2018 in Writ Petition No.10454 of 2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad titled "Vijay Jagannath Shirsath vs.The State of Maharashtra & Ors.” having attained finality, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI 5th MAY,2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C)No. 18956 OF 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ......APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PRAKASH .....RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.8984/2020 titled "Prakash Vs. The State of Mahrashtra & Anr.” passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the judgment and final order 04.04.2014 in Writ Petition No.3187/2014 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad titled "Prakash Mahadu Shirsat Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors.”, having attained finality, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI 5th MAY,2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C)No. 20319 OF 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ......APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ANIL & ANR. .....RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.6835 of 2020 titled “Anil vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.” passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the judgment dated 04.04.2014 in Writ Petition No.9540 of 2013 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, titled "Anil Madhavrao Parate vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.” having attained finality, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI 5TH MAY,2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C)No. 18808 OF 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ......APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SANGITA & ANR. .....RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant lays challenge to the impugned judgment and order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.8970 of 2020 titled “Sangita vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.” passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI 5TH MAY,2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C)No. OF 2025 @ Dy. No.21853/2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ......APPELLANT(S) VERSUS NAMDEO .....RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad in Writ Petition No. 888 of 2021 titled “Namdeo vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.”
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the judgment dated 10.09.2004 in Writ Petition No. 1302 of 1992 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay titled “Namdeo vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.” having attained finality, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
6. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI 5TH MAY,2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.932 OF 2023) STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ......APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SUNIL TARACHAND NIKUME & ANR. .....RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant lays challenge to the impugned judgment dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.3626/2021 titled "Sunil Tarachand Nikume Vs. The State of Mahrashtra & Anr.” passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI 5th MAY,2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C)No.19303 OF 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ......APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PRALHAD & ANR. .......RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant lays challenge to the impugned judgment dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.3528 of 2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad titled "Pralhad vs. The State of Mahrashtra & Anr.”.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI 5TH MAY,2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C)No.19316 OF 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ......APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PRAVIN & ANR. .....RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant lays challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.894 of 2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad titled "Pravin vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.”.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 20.02.2014 in Writ Petition No.4229 of 2013 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur titled "Pravin vs The Principal, Shrikrishnadas Jajoo Grameen Seva Mahavidyalaya & Ors.” having attained finality, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
……………………………………………………J. [SANJAY KAROL] ……………………………………………………J. [MANOJ MISRA] NEW DELHI 5th MAY,2025 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.18113 of 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SHRIRAM S/O RATAN DEVAROY RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.2928 of 2020, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, titled "Shriram vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.”
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.19864 of 2022) STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS KU. GANGA KAMLAKAR PATIL (DHORE), (SAU. GANGA SUBHASH BUDH) & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.3369 of 2021, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, titled "Ku. Ganga Kamlakar Patil (Dhore) vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.”.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 07.08.2013 in Writ Petition No.3955 of 2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Ku. Ganga daughter of Kamlakar Patil vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.”, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.19697 of 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SURESH BABAN SAMBARE & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant lays challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.9032 of 2020, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, titled "Suresh Baban Sambare vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.”.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 01.03.2017 in Writ Petition No.6069 of 2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, titled "Suresh Baban Sambare vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.”, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.18114 of 2022) STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS GOPAL & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.3394 of 2021, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, titled "Gopal vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.”.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 14.08.2013 in Writ Petition No.3871 of 2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Gopal vs. Scheduled Tribe Case Certificate Scrutiny Committee & Anr.”, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.19314 of 2022) STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS VASANT & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.3379 of 2021, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, titled "Vasant vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.”.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 14.08.2013 in Writ Petition No.4366 of 2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Vasanta vs. Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee & Anr.”, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.19315 of 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS KU. NEETA RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.845 of 2021, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, titled "Ku. Neeta vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.”.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 27.01.2015 in Writ Petition No.2458 of 2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Ku. Nita Prabhakarrao Barapatre vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.”, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.18112 of 2022) STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS VIJAY & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.3390 of 2021, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, titled "Vijay vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.”.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 05.08.2013 in Writ Petition No.3560 of 2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Vijay vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.”, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.19312 of 2022) THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS VASANTA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 04.05.2021 in Writ Petition No.935 of 2021, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, titled "Vasanta & Ors. vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.”.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
4. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 19.11.2015 in Writ Petition No.5684 of 2015, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Vasant vs. Joint Commissioner and Vice Chairman, Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee & Ors.”, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment assailed in the present appeal.
5. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
6. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. of 2025) (@ Diary No.7827 of 2025) THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILA PARISHAD, AKOLA & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS VIJAY & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 10.07.2024 in Writ Petition No.3655 of 2024, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Vijay vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.”.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 21.08.2013 in Writ Petition No.4019 of 2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Vijay vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.”, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order assailed in the present appeal.
6. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2025 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. of 2025) (@ Diary No.15060 of 2025) THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ZILA PARISHAD, AKOLA & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS KALPANA & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. The appellants lay challenge to the impugned judgment and final order dated 21.06.2024 in Writ Petition No.3656 of 2024, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Kalpana vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.”.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
5. In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, more so, in view of the order dated 22.04.2015 in Writ Petition No.4023 of 2013, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur, titled "Kalpana vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.”, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order assailed in the present appeal.
6. The Civil Appeal stands disposed of.
7. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
..................J. (SANJAY KAROL) ..................J. (MANOJ MISRA) NEW DELHI;
5th MAY, 2025.
ITEM NO.90 COURT NO.16 SECTION IX
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).4409/2022
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-05-2021 in WP No.3595/2021 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay at Aurangabad] THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA PETITIONER(S) VERSUS BABASO & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) IA No. 36205/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 36206/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. WITH SLP(C) No. 5841/2022 (IX) IA No. 48363/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT IA No. 48360/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 48362/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. W.P.(C) No. 240/2022 (X) IA No. 50175/2022 - APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS IA No. 50177/2022 - EX-PARTE STAY IA No. 50178/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 19696/2022 (IX) IA No. 142947/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 142948/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 18956/2022 (IX) IA No. 139876/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 139877/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 20319/2022 (IX) IA No. 138334/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 138336/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 18808/2022 (IX) IA No. 143815/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 143816/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Diary No(s). 21853/2022 (IX) IA No. 148370/2022 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 148369/2022 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN REFILING / CURING THE DEFECTS IA No. 148371/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 148373/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 932/2023 (IX) IA No. 162005/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 162006/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 19303/2022 (IX) FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 145565/2022 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 145566/2022 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 225397/2023 IA No. 145565/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 145566/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 225397/2023 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 19316/2022 (IX) IA No. 144111/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 144112/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 18113/2022 (IX) IA No. 139999/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 140000/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 19864/2022 (IX) IA No. 143698/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 143699/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 19697/2022 (IX) IA No. 143408/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 143409/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 18114/2022 (IX) IA No. 145206/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 145209/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 19314/2022 (IX) IA No. 143393/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 143396/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 19315/2022 (IX) IA No. 148802/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 148803/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 18112/2022 (IX) IA No. 138508/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 138509/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. SLP(C) No. 19312/2022 (IX) IA No. 145450/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 145451/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Diary No(s). 7827/2025 (IX) FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING ON IA 56487/2025 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT ON IA 56495/2025 FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 56497/2025 IA No. 56487/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 56495/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 56497/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Diary No(s). 15060/2025 (IX) IA No. 79950/2025 - CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING IA No. 79947/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT IA No. 79948/2025 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. Date : 05-05-2025 These matters were called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. Sudhanshu S. Choudhari, Sr. Adv. Mr. Shirish K. Deshpande, AOR Ms. Rucha Pravin Mandlik, Adv. Mr. Mohit Gautam, Adv.
Mr. Apoorv Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rishi Didwania, Adv. Ms. Gautami Yadav, Adv. Ms. Pranjal Chapalgaonkar, Adv.
Mr. Prashant R. Dahat, Adv. Ms. Priya Mittal, Adv.
Mr. Shah Nawaz, Adv.
Mr. T. R. B. Sivakumar, AOR Mr. K. Parmeshwar, Sr. Adv. Mr. K. Parameshwar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Adv. Mr. Shrirang B. Varma, Adv. Mr. Bharat Bagla, Adv.
Mr. Sourav Singh, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Krishna, Adv. Mr. Adarsh Dubey, Adv.
Mr. Anand Dilip Landge, AOR Mrs. Sangeeta Nenwani, Adv. Ms. Revati P. Kharde, Adv. Mr. Sumit Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Prakash Pathak, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Gagan Sanghi, Adv.
Mrs. Farah Hashmi, Adv. Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR Mr. Sandeep Sudhakar Deshmukh, AOR Mr. Nishant Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ankur S. Savadikar, Adv. Mr. Viraj M. Parakh, Adv.
Mr. Shailesh Narnaware, Adv. Mr. Shrey Ravi Dambhare, AOR Mr. Abdulrahiman Tamboli, Adv. Mr. Rahul Joshi, AOR Mrs. B. Sunita Rao, AOR Mr. Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, AOR Ms. Bharti Tyagi, AOR M/S. Black & White Solicitors, AOR Mr. Suhaskumar Kadam, Adv.
Mr. J N Singh, Adv.
Mr. Saurabh Mishra, AOR Mr. Satvik Tripathi, Adv. Ms. Sadhana Singh, Adv. Mr. Ronak Baid, Adv.
Mr. Shantanu M. Adkar, Adv.
Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R W.P.(C) No.240 of 2022:
De-tag and list this petition on 18.07.2025.
Civil Appeals @ Diary Nos.21853/2022, 7827/2025 & 15060/2025:
Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
The appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed orders, which are placed on the file.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
Rest of the matters:
Leave granted.
The appeals are disposed of in terms of the signed orders, which are placed on the file.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(D. NAVEEN) (ANU BHALLA) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
(Total 20 signed orders are placed on the file)