The Court dismissed a writ petition. It held that no interference in the exercise of writ jurisdiction was warranted since the order passed in the lower court (Exhibit 43) had become final. The petitioner's application was rejected.
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 JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1562 OF 2009
Shri Tukaram Aba Gunnar ...Petitioner
V/s.
Shri.Shankar Vithoba Bandgar & Ors. ...Respondents
Mrs.Manish Shekhar i/b M/s.J.Shekhar & Co. for
Petitioner.
None for Respondents.
CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.
FEBRUARY 24, 2009.
P.C.
1. Heard.
2. No interference in exercise of writ
jurisdiction is warranted in the fact situation of
the present case, moreso, when the order passed
below Exhibit 43 has been allowed to become final.
Hence, dismissed.
: 2 :
A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction is warranted when the order below Exhibit 43 has become final.
Petitioner's claim regarding pension/retirement benefits (implied from reference to Exhibit 43).
Shri Tukaram Aba Gunnar
Shri Shankar Vithoba Bandgar
A.M.Khanwilkar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court