Petitioner withdrew writ petition regarding a structure after State promised notice and hearing; petition dismissed as withdrawn.
Petitioner withdrew petition; dismissed as withdrawn.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
WRIT PETITION NO. 481 OF 2006
MR. ABDUL KADAR MUGLIKATTI, ANJUNA, BARDEZ GOA.
....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF GOA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY AND 7 ORS.,
....Respondents
Mr. Siddhath Kalshavkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. S. Kantak, AG with Ms. G. Bhonsle, AGA for Respondent nos.1, 3, 5 and 6.
Coram:S.K. SHAH & N. A. BRITTO, JJ. Date:8th January, 2007
P.C.
The learned AG for the State states that if any action is required to be taken against the subject structure of the petitioner, the State would issue notice and hear the petitioner. In view of this, the learned Counsel for the petitioner withdraws the petition.
The petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
S.K. SHAH, J.
N. A. BRITTO, J.
arp/*
ABDUL KADAR MUGLIKATTI
STATE OF GOA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY
S.K. SHAH
N. A. BRITTO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
