In an Letters Patent Appeal, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay held that the Single Judge's refusal to interfere under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution was not a legal error, and thus, no interference was called for.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
L.P.A. NO.139 OF 2005
------------------------------------:----------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of : Court’s or Judge’s orders.
coram, appearances, Court’s orders :
or directions and Registrar’s :
orders. :
------------------------------------:-----------------------------------
Mr S.S.Pakle, for the appellants.
Mr M.S.Topkar, for the respondent.
CORAM: V.G.PALSHIKAR &
D.B.BHOSALE,JJ.
DATED: 24.10.2005
P.C.:
Heard the learned counsel for the
parties.
By this appeal, the appellants have
challenged the order passed by the learned
Single Judge of this Court. We have
scrutinised the order impugned. There is no
legal or jurisdictional error committed by
the learned Judge. The learned Judge was
exercising extra ordinary jurisdiction of
this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution and has declined to interfere
in exercise of such jurisdiction. Such
refusal to exercise extra ordinary
jurisdiction cannot be termed as a
jurisdictional error or a legal error.
Hence, no interference is called for. The
Letters Patent Appeal dismissed.
(D.B.BHOSALE,J.) (V.G.PALSHIKAR,J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the refusal by the Single Judge to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution constitutes a legal or jurisdictional error warranting interference.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Appellants
Respondent
V.G.PALSHIKAR
D.B.BHOSALE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court