Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 599 (BOM)

Harish Melwani, trading in the name & style of M/s H. L. Nathurmal, with office at Rizvi Chambers v. State of Goa by its Chief Secretary

2012-03-19

S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, U.V.BAKRE

body2012
Judgment S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J. 1. When these matters were called out to consider the request of the petitioners for grant of interim relief, Mr. Rivonkar, Special Counsel appearing on behalf of State of Goa and Department of Science, Technology and Environment, Government of Goa states on instructions that the State has decided to withdraw the Notification dated 11/08/2011 published in the official gazette of Government of Goa and issue a revised notification. 2. In view of this statement, the challenge to the notification itself would not survive and, therefore, instead of keeping these petitions pending for grant of interim relief, with the consent of the petitioners' Advocate, we have taken up these petitions for final hearing and disposal. 3. In view of the statements made by the learned Special Counsel on instructions and the State having decided to withdraw the notification, nothing survives in these writ petitions and the challenge raised by the petitioners is rendered infructuous and academic. The writ petitions are, therefore, disposed of in view of the statement made by the learned Special Counsel on instructions and recorded as above. 4. The grievance now made is that the petitioners have been served with Notices of Demand under the Notification in question. In the light of the statement made by Shri Rivonkar on instructions and the State having decided to withdraw the notification, needless to clarify that notice of demand issued in pursuance thereof would not survive and no recovery can be made in terms thereof. It would be open for the petitioners individually to apply and seek refund of such amounts as are paid in furtherance of the notification and notice of demand. Leaving open all such remedies and also clarifying that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the issues raised in the writ petitions, the writ petitions are disposed of.