The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad declined to interfere in a writ petition regarding the release of sugar quota, dismissing the plea for extraordinary writ jurisdiction.
Dismissal of the writ petition.
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 BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Writ Petition No.8556 Of 2009
Dr.Baburao Bapuji Tanpure Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Shrishivajinagar. . .. Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India And Others. . .. Respondents.
Shri. V.B. Patil Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri. Alok Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General,
for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
Shri. V.H. Dighe, Assistant Government Pleader for
respondent Nos.5 and 6.
CORAM: NARESH H PATIL & K.U. CHANDIWAL, JJ.
DATE: 16th DECEMBER 2009
PER COURT :
1)Heard.
2)The learned counsel for the petitioner
states that the petitioner has approached the
Central Government for releasing the sugar quota.
2
3)In view of this, no interference is
called for in exercise of extra ordinary writ
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India. The writ petition is dismissed.
(K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.) (NARESH H PATIL, J.)
rsl/ wp.8556.09
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr. Baburao Bapuji Tanpure Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.
The Union of India
NARESH H PATIL
K.U. CHANDIWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court