Quit default by the petitioner. The High Court was forced to dismiss the writ petition because the petitioner failed to appear on behalf.
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORIGINAL SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO.341 OF 1993
Dr.Vishnu Waman Deshpande vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors.
Petitioner
Respondents
None for the petitioner.
Ms.Geeta Shastri, A.G.P. for respondents 1 and 2.
Mr.V.P.Vaidya for the respondent no.5.
CORAM : R. M. LODHA & J.P. DEVADHAR,JJ .
DATED : 11th August 2005
P.C.
| None | appears f |
or the |
petitioner. | Ms.Geeta Shastri, |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A.G.P. | appears | for | the | State | Government. | |
| Mr.V.P | .Vaidya, | advocate | appears | for the |
respondent no.5. |
|
| For | want | of appea |
rance on |
behalf of |
the | petitioner, we |
are constrained to dismiss the writ petition in default.
We order accordingly. Rule is discharged. No costs.
(R.M. LODHA,J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR,J.)
Dr.Vishnu Waman Deshpande
The State of Maharashtra
R.M. Lodha
J.P. Devadhar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
