Nominal Index [Citation 221 - 234]Telex Advertising Pvt Ltd v. Central Railway 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 221Glencore India Pvt Ltd v. Amma Lines Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 222Mahendra Bansilal Patil v. Commissioner of Transport & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 223PCIT v. Tata Steel 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 224Sham v. Walve 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 225Aniruddha Ganesh Pathak v. Registrar General, Bombay High Court...
Nominal Index [Citation 221 - 234]
Telex Advertising Pvt Ltd v. Central Railway 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 221
Glencore India Pvt Ltd v. Amma Lines Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 222
Mahendra Bansilal Patil v. Commissioner of Transport & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 223
PCIT v. Tata Steel 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 224
Sham v. Walve 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 225
Aniruddha Ganesh Pathak v. Registrar General, Bombay High Court and Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 226
Indus Towers Limited v. Rajendra Patil (Yedravkar) and Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 227
Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. Dattatraya Ganpat Bankhele 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 228
Bhushan Industries v. Lohasingh Ramavadh Yadav 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 229
Taher Fakhruddin Saheb v. Mufaddal Burhanuddin Saifuddin 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 230
Nilesh Chandrakant Kamble v. MMRDA Govt of Maharashtra & Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 231
XYZ v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 232
Viraj Chetan Shah v. Union of India and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 233
Shramik Janata Sangh and Ors v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 234
Reports/Judgments
Power Of General Manager Of Employer To Confirm Nomination Of Arbitrator By The Contractor Runs Contrary To Principles Of Impartiality And Independence: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Telex Advertising Pvt Ltd v. Central Railway
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 221
The High Court of Bombay held that the power of General Manager of the employer to confirm nomination of arbitrator by the Contractor runs contrary to principles of impartiality and independence. It held that nomination by a party of its arbitrator cannot be subject to approval by the other party.
The bench of Justice Bharati Dangre held that for an appointment of arbitrator from a panel unilaterally prepared by a party, it must be broad and diverse to allow free choice to the other party and any deviation would be hit by Section 12(5) of the Act.
Arbitrator's Mandate Would Not Be Terminated When The Delays In Arbitral Proceedings Are Not Attributable To It: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Glencore India Pvt Ltd v. Amma Lines Limited
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 222
The High Court of Bombay held that an arbitrator's mandate would not terminate when the proceedings are not completed within timelines agreed by the parties, if the delays in the conduct of the proceedings are attributable to the party seeking termination of the mandate.
The bench of Justice Bharati Dangre held that generally, in an arbitration not governed by Section 29A, the arbitrator's mandate expires upon its failure to conclude the proceedings within the time period agreed by the parties, however, it would not hold true when the tribunal acted expeditiously and the delays in proceedings were on account of fault of the parties themselves.
Bombay High Court Strikes Down State's Circular Imposing Additional Conditions For Registration Of Govt Employee Vehicles Under “BH Series”
Case Title: Mahendra Bansilal Patil v. Commissioner of Transport & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 223
The Bombay High Court quashed the State government's circular providing additional conditions for registration of vehicles belonging to government employees under the “BH series”.
A division bench of Justice GS Kulkarni and Justice Firdosh P Pooniwalla allowed a writ petition filed by Civil Judge Mahendra Bansilal Patil challenging the Commissioner of Transport's refusal to register his newly purchased motor vehicle under the 'BH series'.
“in the absence of any power conferred on the Commissioner to super impose conditions on any applicant seeking registration of the vehicles, which are not conditions under Central Rules (Supra), the Commissioner could not have issued such circular”, the court observed.
Tata Steel Entitled To Treat Contribution Of Rs. 212.52 Crores To CAF As Revenue Expenditure: Bombay High Court
Case Title: PCIT v. Tata Steel
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 224
The Bombay High Court held that Tata Steel is entitled to treat the contribution of Rs. 212.52 crores to the Compensatory Afforestation Fund (CAF) as revenue expenditure.
The bench of Justice K. R. Shriram and Justice Neela Gokhale relied on the decision of the Bombay High Court (Goa Bench) in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax v. Dr. Prafulla R. Hede, and another has accepted that a contribution to CAF will be revenue expenditure and not capital in nature.
Error On Part Of Auditor Should Be Accepted As Reasonable Cause Shown By Trust Management For Delay Condonation: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Sham v. Walve
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 225
The Bombay High Court held that the error on the part of the auditor cannot be rejected but should be accepted as a reasonable cause shown by the trust management.
The bench of Justice KR Shriram and Justice Neela Gokhale observed that an assessee, a public charitable trust with almost over thirty years, which otherwise satisfies the condition for availing exemption, should not be denied the same merely on the bar of limitation, especially when the legislature has conferred wide discretionary powers to condone such delay on the authorities concerned.
Judges Must Not Tarnish Image Of Judiciary: Bombay High Court Upholds Removal Of Civil Judge Who Arrived At Judicial Academy In Inebriated State
Case Title: Aniruddha Ganesh Pathak v. Registrar General, Bombay High Court and Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 226
The Bombay High Court upheld state government's order removing civil judge Aniruddha Ganesh Pathak from judicial service due to unilateral adjournment of cases, failure to follow court timings and arriving under the influence of alcohol.
A division bench of Justice AS Chandurkar & Justice Jitendra Jain observed –
“It is a universally accepted norm that Judges and Judicial Officers must act with dignity and must not indulge in a conduct or behaviour which is likely to affect the image of judiciary or which unbecoming of a Judicial Officer. If the Members of the judiciary indulge in a behaviour which is blameworthy or which is unbecoming of a Judicial Officer, the Writ Courts are not expected to intervene and grant relief to such a Judicial Officer.”
The court dismissed Pathak's writ petition challenging an order dated January 14, issued by the Secretary, Law and Judiciary Department, Mumbai, which directed Pathak's removal from service.
Undisputed Employer-Employee Relationship Must For Proceedings Under Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970: Bombay High Court Set Asides Industrial Court Order
Case Title: Indus Towers Limited v. Rajendra Patil (Yedravkar) and Anr.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 227
The Bombay High Court single bench of Justice Amit Borkar held that for the proceedings under the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970, the relationship between employer-employee should be undisputed. The court held that in absence of such a relationship, the labour court or the industrial court doesn't have any jurisdiction to deal with the matter falling under the provisions of Contract Labour (Regulation & Abolition) Act, 1970.
Lengthy Period Of Absence Without Leave Documentation Is Unjustified, Bombay High Court Reduces Back Wages Of MSRTC's Employee
Case Title: Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation v. Dattatraya Ganpat Bankhele
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 228
The High Court of Bombay single bench of Justice Sandeep V. Marne held that lengthy periods of absence from duty without proper leave documentation are unjustified, regardless of the plausibility of the reason behind the absence.
The High Court acknowledged that the Labour Court's decision of reinstatement of the absent employee with 25% back wages could not be reversed as the employer failed to challenge it. However, the Industrial Court was unjustified to increase the back wages to 100%, in the absence of concrete reasons.
Abandonment Of Service Needs To Be Established By Conduction Of Enquiry: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Bhushan Industries v. Lohasingh Ramavadh Yadav
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 229
A single judge bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of Justice Sandeep V. Marne while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of Bhushan Industries vs Lohasingh Ramavadh Yadav held that abandonment of service is a question of fact that needs to be established by conduction of an enquiry.
If the Petitioner actually believed that the Respondent has abandoned his services, at least a show cause notice ought to have been issued to the Respondent. Since correspondence was on going between the Petitioner and the Respondent, it was possible for the Petitioner to conduct an enquiry accusing the Respondent of absconding from his duties, the court observed.
Least Plausible For Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin To Think Of Appointing Successor Immediately After Assuming Office In 1965: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Taher Fakhruddin Saheb v. Mufaddal Burhanuddin Saifuddin
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 230
The Bombay High Court observed that Taher Fakhruddin, challenger to his uncle Mufaddal Saiffuddin's position as the Dai al-Mutlaq of the Dawoodi Bohra community, accepted vague indications for his own nass, but dismissed concrete evidence for the nass conferred on Syedna Saifuddin.
The court found it “least plausible” that Syedna Mohammed Burhanuddin, the 52nd Dai, immediately thought of appointing his successor upon assuming office in 1965 at 51 years of age, as claimed by Fakhruddin.
The court held that Fakhruddin's suit failed on all counts of likelihood, probability, balance, preponderance, prudence.
The court emphasized that the suit is a civil claim, distinct from matters of faith, and it is deciding not who should more appropriately be the Dai, but merely who proved, according to civil law, his claim of having properly appointed the 53rd Dai.
The court observed that it's not within its purview to conclusively determine religious doctrine, and refused to affirmatively or prescriptively elucidate the requirements of a valid nass. Instead, it assessed whether Fakhruddin substantiated his claim regarding the requirements of a Nass. The court held that Fakhruddin failed to prove his case on requirements of a valid “nass”.
Contractors Challenging Tender Conditions Via PIL Pollute Purity Of The Stream Of Public Interest Litigation: Bombay High Court
Case Title: Nilesh Chandrakant Kamble v. MMRDA Govt of Maharashtra & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 231
The Bombay High Court observed that permitting contractors to file PILs challenging tender conditions is a sheer abuse of process of the court, and “pollutes purity of the stream of PIL”.
A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Upadhyaya and Justice Arif S Doctor dismissed a PIL by a contractor against a tender issued by Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA), and imposed costs of Rs. 50,000 on the petitioner.
“However, permitting a contractor to file a PIL petition challenging the conditions of a tender, in our opinion, is nothing but a sheer abuse of process of Court and an effort to pollute the purity of the stream of public interest litigation. The petitioner has himself stated in the petition that he is engaged in the similar business as mentioned in the subject tender. Accordingly, this petition cannot be permitted to be entertained as a PIL petition.”
The court opined that the petition, purportedly filed in public interest, was actually filed with oblique motives. The petitioner, claiming to be a social worker engaged in a similar business as mentioned in the tender, claimed to be aggrieved by certain conditions of the subject tender.
'Sordid State Of Affairs': Bombay High Court Orders SP To Personally Look Into Rape Probe After Noting IO May Have Ulterior Intentions
Case Title: XYZ v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 232
The Bombay High Court ordered the Superintendent of Police, Jalgaon to personally look into an investigation into a rape case after noting that the investigating officer (IO) may have some ulterior intentions considering his unresponsiveness.
A division bench of Justice Mangesh S Patil and Justice Shailesh P Brahme noted that despite promptly reporting to the police, the offence under Section 376 was added later in the FIR for reasons best known to the IO.
The court noted a "sordid state of affairs," observing that despite a strong motive, medical evidence, and witness statements consistent with the allegations in the FIR, the prosecutor did not have instructions on how to proceed.
The court directed the Superintendent of Police, Jalgaon, to take appropriate steps including change in IO after thoroughly examining all aspects including the charge sheet. The court directed the appointment of a woman police officer of not less than the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police to lead the inquiry.
"Strong-Arm Tactics": Bombay High Court Says Public Sector Banks Can't Request Look Out Circulars Against Defaulters, Quashes LOCs
Case Title: Viraj Chetan Shah v. Union of India and Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 233
The Bombay High Court observed that Look Out Circulars (LOCs) issued by Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) against loan defaulters at the behest of public sector banks (PSBs) are strong-arm tactics to circumvent legal processes and violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
“The LOCs boil down to nothing but a strong-arm tactic to bypass or leapfrog what PSBs clearly see as inconveniences and irritants — the courts of law”, the court said.
A division bench of Justice GS Patel and Justice Madhav J Jamdar struck down the LOCs as well as the provisions of governing Office Memoranda (OMs) that empowered PSBs to seek LOCs against loan defaulters.
The court held that the right to travel abroad, part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be curtailed by an executive action without any governing statute or controlling statutory provision.
“For what is being suggested is that (a) there is no controlling statute; therefore (b) executive action must suffice, and consequently (c) mere executive action can infringe an Article 21 fundamental right. That is the inevitable consequence of this argument, and it simply cannot be accepted”, the court said, rejecting Union of India's argument.
The court rejected arguments of wider public interest justifying LOCs. “No amount of 'public interest' can substitute for a 'procedure established by law', i.e., by a statute, statutory rule or statutory regulation in the matter of deprivation of the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India”, the court held.
Ensure Effective Implementation Of Law Against Manual Scavenging: Bombay High Court To State
Case Title: Shramik Janata Sangh and Ors v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 234
The Bombay High Court called for information from the Municipal Corporations of Greater Mumbai, Thane, Kalyan-Dombivali, and Mira-Bhayander on steps taken for effective implementation of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and Their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.
These Municipal Corporations have to furnish the information in the first phase of gathering information from the entire state.
The reply affidavit must state whether State Monitoring Committee, Vigilance Committees, State Level Survey Committee, District Level Survey Committee and Sub Divisional Committee at Divisional Level, have been constituted and their composition. If the committees are not constituted, the affidavit has to state what steps have been taken to form the committees. The affidavit also has to state the steps taken for identification and rehabilitation of manual scavengers, and any schemes implemented by the local authorities.
A division bench of Justice Nitin Jamdar and Justice MM Sathaye observed -
“The first step that needs to be taken to address the wider issue, is to ensure that the statutory authorities constituted under the Act of 2013 are established and are functional and have the requisite manpower and necessary administrative setup.”
The court was dealing with a writ petition filed Shramik Janata Sangh, an association working for manual scavengers and seeking compensation for the family of a person who died while manual scavenging.
Other Developments
FIRs For Alleged Hate Speech Registered Against BJP MLAs Nitesh Rane And Geeta Jain: Maharashtra Police To Bombay High Court (livelaw.in)
The Maharashtra Police informed the Bombay High Court that criminal cases have been registered against BJP MLA Nitesh Rane for alleged hate speeches in Malwani, Mankhurd, Ghatkopar. FIR is also registered against MLA Gita Jain for alleged hate speech in Mira Bhayander from January to March this year.
The FIRs have been registered under sections 153A (promoting enmity between groups on ground of religion etc.), 504 (intentional insult with intent to provoke) and 506 (criminal intimidation) and other relevant provisions of the IPC.
Public Prosecutor Hiten Venegavkar also told the court that 13 cases have been registered regarding the violence that erupted in Mira Road between January 22 and January 26, 2024.
[Children Drown In Open Water Tank] Rs. 10 Lakhs Compensation Approved For Parents: BMC Tells Bombay High Court (livelaw.in)
The Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) informed the Bombay High Court that ad-hoc compensation of Rs 10 lakhs as a special case will be given to the parents of two minor boys who drowned in an open water tank at a civic garden in Mumbai's Wadala.
Senior Advocate Anil Singh for BMC submitted that the concerned contractor will pay the compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs per victim to the parents. He further submitted that the water tank is now properly covered.
Only Time Can Assess How One Acquits Oneself In The Enterprise Of Cause Of Justice: Bombay High Court Bids Farewell To Justice Gautam Patel (livelaw.in)
The Bombay High Court held a Full Court Farewell Reference to bid adieu to Justice Gautam Patel, as he retired after a tenure spanning over a decade.
Justice Patel expressed gratitude for the honour of a Full Court Reference, a tradition that has never been observed before in the Bombay HC on the occasion of a judge's retirement. He reflected on the significance of serving the cause of justice and acknowledged the invaluable support he received from members of the bar, both senior and junior. Justice Patel also credited his friends, who provided constructive criticism and guidance, keeping him on the right path.
Justice Patel reflected on the inability of individuals to assess their own contributions to the justice system, recognizing that history would ultimately judge their actions. Instead of dwelling on self-assessment, he emphasized the importance of gratitude and thanksgiving for the opportunities and support received throughout his career.