Disposed
Ramrao Dagdu Gavande v. the State of Mahrashtra and Ors.
Bombay HCWP/1633/2011
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE…
What the court decided
AI extract
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 APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1633 OF 2011
Ramrao s/o. Dagdu Gavande
....Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
....Respondents.
Mr. K. R. Doke, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.V. Kurundkar, Addl. Govt. Pleader for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Mr. S. R. Pande, Advocate for respondent No. 5.
CORAM: B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.
DATED: 7th March, 2011.
COURT'S ORDER :
2
nothing, but refusal to exercise jurisdiction. As respective counsel for respondents have no instructions on facts, I am not recording any finding in this respect. The grievance of petitioner can be ventilated by directing the petitioner and respondent No. 3 to appear before respondent No. 1 on 30th March 2011. Respondent No. 1 shall proceed to hear the parties on interim relief on that date or on such other date that may be convenient to him.
[ B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.]
ssc/wp1633.11
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the delay in hearing the interim stay application amounts to a refusal to exercise jurisdiction.
Ramrao s/o. Dagdu Gavande
The State of Maharashtra
B.P. DHARMADHIKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court