Petitioner withdrew the writ petition. The court recalled the cost order imposed on the petitioner and dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
Recalled the order imposing cost on the petitioner; dismissed the petition as withdrawn.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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4183 OF 2008
Khatal Ahmad M. Kaseem Dandu. .. Petitioner.
vs.
State of Maharashtra
& Ors. .. Respondents.
Mr. R.K. Mendadkar for Petitioner.
Mr. A.L. Patki, Spl. Counsel for Respondent
Nos. 1, 2 and 5.
CORAM: J.N. PATEL, &
S.J. KATHAWALLA, JJ.
DATE: 13TH OCTOBER, 2008.
P.C.
. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner does not want to prosecute the
petition and he may be permitted to withdraw the
petition. In view of the fact that the learned counsel
for the petitioner has withdrawn the petition, the
order imposing cost on the petitioner is recalled. The
petition is permitted to be withdrawn. The petition is
dismissed as withdrawn.
(J.N. Patel, J.)
2
(S.J. Kathawalla, J.)
Khatal Ahmad M. Kaseem Dandu
State of Maharashtra
J.N. Patel
S.J. Kathawalla
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court