XEROX O-4sto / 2009 CASENG.: P Aptyo/o9 Prepared by : MRSOUU, DONWALKAR ASSISTANT | Be -SHRIC.P.PATIL CLERK a RS. PRPATL CLERK oe Compaied by | NIRS. D.D.ISWALKAR ASSISTANT. er RRS, 5.A.M.SHAK ASSISTANT Verified & Examined by:MRS.P.K.PATIL SECTION OFRICER Pages ; Wa Typing / Merexing and Comparing Changes: fe Pe Roy = oo ocssenes TOTAL RUPEES Five hewelreol # Powe ens peer °) Date of Application toy fer / 2009 2) Cote on which office objection remeved: 3) The date on whieh apeioation was completed : = 1 Thadate onwhich copy wostecdy 14 / pf 207 5) The date on which copy wosdalivered = = peg pe | re? . i Cerfited Copy Branch High Court, Appellate Side, Born Core) 5 : i aaIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION l wert petition no. 479° oR 2008. (Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) DISTRICT; PUNE Shri Javed Ramjan Shaikh. ).. Petitioner, VERSUS Superintendent of State Excise, i Pune & Ore. |.. Respondents. LH Dp ee S.No. EXH 7 PAGE NO. 4) ynopsis. ee 40 * Memo of Petition ye VB 3} ‘AY Colly,) Tse eupies of certain letters ieee : jsaued by the Petitioner in ‘4 the name of Respondents. 4) 8 rue copy of eMidave dared tae Ee PS March, 2008 5]! True copy of letter dated 1.29804 ~~ issued by 2xccutive Engineer of P.C.M.C. to Petitioner. 8] “DYColly.) True copy of map iasued by ny ‘Office af City Survey Otlicer, Pimpari Chinchwad on 18.3,2009. “I ‘E1Colly.) True Copies of the documents showing % 4A : SH where Howel of Respondent is dituated. 7] Fically.; True copies of docun enatruction is on plot No. 86. copies ef letter dated 31.4.2008 are nits Nog. | and 2 ial 4132. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION writ Petition No. 474° ox 2009, (Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India} DISTRICT: PUNE Shri Javed Ramjan Shailh. |.. Petitioner. VERSUS Superintendent of State Excise, Pune & Ors. |.. Respondents. SYNOPSIS DATES. EVENTS/ PARTICULARS _ nt August, 2007, A Women Activist from Pragati Mahila Vikas Mandal has given representation to the Petitioner stating therein that the women are harassed by the country liquer shop and beer shoppee in the vicinity of ward No. 52. The Petitioner in turn gave written complaints to the Respondents seeking certain actions ngninst gaid country liquor shop and beer shopper. ‘The said Country liquer shop, Beer Shoppees as well as Wine Shop within the vicinity of ward No. 52 have been closed down by the order of Respondents. The Respondent No. 8 thas also taken care to demolish the Illegal TERTIFIED COPY