{"id":343047,"date":"2025-03-06T12:00:09","date_gmt":"2025-03-06T06:30:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=343047"},"modified":"2025-03-11T09:47:34","modified_gmt":"2025-03-11T04:17:34","slug":"bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018Cannot direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate’; Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Bombay High Court:<\/span> The petitioner, formerly known as Mumbai Gambling Management Pvt. Ltd., filed the present petition under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> praying for a relief that the Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976<\/a> (‘the 1976 Act’), which was never notified and brought into force, and which stood repealed by the Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) (Repeal) Act, 2023<\/a> (‘the Repeal Act’), be directed to be brought into force, by declaring that the Repeal Act was ultra vires the Constitution. The Division Bench of G.S. Kulkarni*<\/span> and Advait M. Sethna, JJ., opined that in the present case, the prayers were indirectly a relief that the Legislature be directed to re-legislate the 1976 Act<\/a>. The Court held that a writ could not be issued to the Legislature to unbury or re-legislate, therefore, such revival of the 1976 Act<\/a> and that too by a Writ of the Court, was an impossibility and a far-fetched expectation, of the petitioner, which the law could never recognize.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The petitioner being engaged in hospitality business and running hotels and resorts, was desirous to open and operate casinos in the State of Maharashtra and thus, in relation to the same, the petitioner made a proposal to the State authorities including the Maharashtra Tourism Development Corporation.<\/p>\n

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that an order dated 9-10-2015 was passed by this Court in Jay N. Sayta<\/span> v. State of Maharashtra<\/span>, Public Interest Litigation No. 19 of 2015, whereby the State Government was granted six months’ time to take an appropriate decision on whether it intended to bring the provisions of the 1976 Act<\/a> into force. Thereafter, the State Government decided not to bring the 1976 Act<\/a> into force and that the said 1976 Act<\/a> be repealed and thus, the State Legislature passed the Repeal Act. The petitioner, being aggrieved by such action on the part of the respondents, filed the present petition.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court stated that the relief was too far-fetched as it was within the domain of the Legislature to enact a particular law and repeal it. The Court further stated that about 49 years back, the State Legislature enacted the 1976 Act<\/a> and the State as a matter of public policy never thought it appropriate to bring the said legislation into force.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that none of the rights of the petitioner under the 1976 Act<\/a> were affected for it to be aggrieved by the Repeal Act, because the 1976 Act was never brought into force. The Court opined that the 1976 Act<\/a> was “still born” and thus, when the 1976 Act<\/a> itself was a dead letter, no legal rights could accrue to the petitioner to maintain the present petition.<\/p>\n

The Court rejected the contention that a legislation which was not brought into force could create any legal rights in favour of any person. The Court thus opined that there could not be any objection to the repeal of the 1976 Act<\/a>, as both the actions of the State Legislature, namely, to frame a law and to repeal the law, was prerogative and the domain of the State Legislature within its powers under the Constitution.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that in the present case, the prayers were indirectly a relief that the Legislature be directed to re-legislate the 1976 Act<\/a>. The Court stated that it could never be the case that by setting aside of the Repeal Act, the petitioner would achieve revival\/re-birth of the original legislation, because the consequence of the repeal of the 1976 Act<\/a> had already taken effect, that is, it was no longer on the statute book, as it lays deeply buried.<\/p>\n

The Court held that there could not be a writ to be issued to the Legislature to unbury or re-legislate, therefore, such revival of the 1976 Act<\/a> and that too by a Writ of the Court, was an impossibility and a far-fetched expectation, of the petitioner, which the law could never recognize. The Court further held that the relief prayed for by the petitioner could not be granted as an act of the legislature could be declared ultra vires on three established parameters, (a) that the legislation was beyond the legislative competence; (b) that it was violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution or any other constitutional provisions; and (c) it was manifestly arbitrary.<\/p>\n

The Court rejected the present petition as it was patently misconceived.<\/p>\n

[Dyutbhumi Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, 2025 SCC OnLine Bom 521<\/a>, decided on 26-2-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment authored by: Justice G.S. Kulkarni<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Petitioner:<\/span> Anil Sakhare a\/w Manish Kelkar;<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> S.D. Vyas, Addl. G.P. a\/w. Tejas Kapre, AGP.<\/p>\n

Buy Constitution of India  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"Constitution<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 Act is “still born” and thus, when the 1976 Act itself is a dead letter, no legal rights can accrue to the petitioner to maintain the present petition.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":314919,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2569,79457,77423,67743,11851,79456,79458,79455],"class_list":["post-343047","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-casino","tag-justice-advait-m-sethna","tag-justice-g-s-kulkarni","tag-legislature","tag-maharashtra-casinos-act-1976","tag-maharashtra-casinos-act-2023","tag-re-legislate"],"yoast_head":"\nBombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Bombay High Court rejected plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 as it could not direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018Cannot direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate'; Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court rejected plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 as it could not direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-03-06T06:30:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-03-11T04:17:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018Cannot direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate'; Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/\",\"name\":\"Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-03-06T06:30:09+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-11T04:17:34+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\"},\"description\":\"Bombay High Court rejected plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 as it could not direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Bombay High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018Cannot direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate’; Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\",\"name\":\"Simranjeet\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Simranjeet\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 | SCC Times","description":"Bombay High Court rejected plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 as it could not direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018Cannot direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate'; Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976","og_description":"Bombay High Court rejected plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 as it could not direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-03-06T06:30:09+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-03-11T04:17:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Simranjeet","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018Cannot direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate'; Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Simranjeet","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/","name":"Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2025-03-06T06:30:09+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-11T04:17:34+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd"},"description":"Bombay High Court rejected plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976 as it could not direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Bombay High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/06\/bomhc-rejects-plea-to-revive-maharashtra-casinos-control-and-tax-act-1976\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018Cannot direct legislature to unbury or re-legislate’; Bombay HC rejects plea to revive Maharashtra Casinos (Control and Tax) Act, 1976"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd","name":"Simranjeet","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Simranjeet"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":241116,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/23\/bom-hc-is-there-any-prohibition-for-possession-of-skin-of-dead-animals-under-maharashtra-animal-preservation-act-1976-hc-highlights-the-difference-between-flesh-and-skin\/","url_meta":{"origin":343047,"position":0},"title":"Bom HC | Is there any prohibition for possession of skin of dead animals under Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976? HC highlights the difference between animal ‘flesh’ and ‘skin’","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 23, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0The Division Bench of V.M. Deshpande and Anil S. Kilor, JJ., addressed the issue on whether there is any prohibition for the possession of skin of dead animals under Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976. Applicant was an accused of the offences punishable under Section 5-(A), 5- (B), 5-(C),\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":290156,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/20\/bombay-high-court-settles-the-ulc-premium-conundrum-in-maharashtra\/","url_meta":{"origin":343047,"position":1},"title":"Bombay High Court Settles the ULC Premium Conundrum in Maharashtra","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 20, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"by Abhiraj Gandhi\u2020 and Nirali Shah\u2020\u2020 Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 34","rel":"","context":"In "Experts Corner"","block_context":{"text":"Experts Corner","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/experts_corner\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"ulc premium in maharashtra","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/ulc-premium-in-maharashtra.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/ulc-premium-in-maharashtra.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/ulc-premium-in-maharashtra.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/ulc-premium-in-maharashtra.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":216367,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/07\/02\/heres-why-justice-indu-malhotra-recused-herself-from-hearing-pleas-against-bombay-hc-order-on-laws-on-beef\/","url_meta":{"origin":343047,"position":2},"title":"Here’s why Justice Indu Malhotra recused herself from hearing pleas against Bombay HC order on laws on beef","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"July 2, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Justice Indu Malhotra has recused herself from hearing a batch of appeals and cross-appeals challenging a Bombay High Court verdict which held that mere possession of beef of animals slaughtered outside the State cannot invite criminal action.\u00a0 A bench headed by Justice A M Sapre said that Justice\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Hot Off The Press"","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":46361,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/05\/09\/constitutional-validity-of-sections-5d-and-9b-of-maharashtra-animal-preservation-act-struck-down\/","url_meta":{"origin":343047,"position":3},"title":"Constitutional validity of Sections 5D and 9B of Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, struck down","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 9, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: Deciding a petition challenging various provisions of Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act 1976 as amended by Maharashtra\u00a0 Preservation Act 1995, a bench consisting A.S. Oka and S.C. Gupte, J.J., struck down two amendments of\u00a0 Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act 1976 and upheld the constitutional validity of rest of the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":116461,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/03\/27\/bombay-high-courts-order-upholding-the-state-legislature-imposing-tax-on-anything-shown-on-electronic-and-print-media-stayed\/","url_meta":{"origin":343047,"position":4},"title":"Bombay High Court\u2019s order upholding the State Legislature imposing tax on anything shown on electronic and print media stayed","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 27, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the matter where the Indian Broadcasting Foundation had appealed against the order of the Bombay High Court which upheld the constitutionality of the amendment to the \u00a0Maharashtra Stamp Act which levied stamp duty on the execution of the document pertaining to advertisement, the bench of Dipak Misra\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":293450,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/30\/know-your-judge-justice-rd-dhanuka-chief-justice-bombayhighcourt-retires-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":343047,"position":5},"title":"46th Chief Justice of Bombay High Court, Justice Ramesh Deokinandan Dhanuka, retires after a very brief tenure of 3 days","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 30, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice R.D. Dhanuka, whose appointment as the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court was notified on 26-05-2023, retires today after a very short tenure of 3 days!","rel":"","context":"In "Know thy Judge"","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"justice ramesh deokinandan dhanuka","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-ramesh-deokinandan-dhanuka.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-ramesh-deokinandan-dhanuka.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-ramesh-deokinandan-dhanuka.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/justice-ramesh-deokinandan-dhanuka.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/343047","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=343047"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/343047\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=343047"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=343047"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=343047"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}