Petitioner in a writ petition stated that the challenge had become infructuous due to the passage of time. Respondents consented to the matter with no objection.
The writ petition was disposed of as infructuous.
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.
WP-10786.10
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
WRIT PETITION NO. 10786 OF 2010
Maruti Laxmanrao Landge Petitioner versus The State of Maha. and others Respondents
Shri S.S. Khotkar Advocte holding for Shri Nitneen V. Gaware, Adv. for the petitioner. Shri S.K. Tambe, A.G.P. for Resp. No.1 to 3. Shri G.K. Thigle for Respondent No. 4.
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : JULY 26, 2012
P. C.
due to passage of time, challenge in the petition has become infructuous. Learned Counsel for the respective respondents have no objection.
(SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.) (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.) pnd/WP-10786.10
Maruti Laxmanrao Landge
The State of Maharashtra
B. P. Dharmadhikari
Sunil P. Deshmukh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
