Petitioner challenged a conciliator's failure report. The High Court declined to entertain the petition under Article 226, directing the petitioner to pursue alternative remedies available under law.
Petitioner at liberty to pursue alternate remedy available under law.
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.
W.P. NO. 7498.10.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 7498 OF 2010
Anant s/o Atmaram Joshi
.. PETITIONER
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra
& others
.. RESPONDENTS
Mr. Abhijeet Kulkarni, advocate holding for Mr. S.S. Nirkhee, advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. V.H. Dighe, AGP for the State.
=====
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE : 2nd DECEMBER, 2010
PER COURT :
Conciliator has intimated failure report insofar as conciliation proceedings
are concerned.
W.P. NO. 7498.10.odt
2
ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However,
petitioner would be at liberty to take recourse of the alternate remedy as is
available to him under law. Petition is dismissed with aforesaid liberty.
( R. M. BORDE ) ( B. R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE
dyb/office/wp7498.10.odt
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court was inclined to entertain the writ petition challenging the conciliator's failure report?
Whether the petitioner could seek alternative remedies under law?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Anant s/o Atmaram Joshi
The State of Maharashtra
B.R. Gavai
R.M. Borde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
