The High Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has an alternate remedy under the Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samiti Rules and dismissed the petition accordingly.
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
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.3601 OF 2011
Office Notes, Office
Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's
orders or directions
andRegistrar's
orders.
Court's or Judge's orders
Mr.S.G.Magre, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.G.R.Ingole, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.V.D.Hon, advocate for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3.
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.
Date : 24.01.2012.
PER COURT :
2
present Writ Petition.
(S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.)
Dt.24.01.2012. asp/office/wp3601.11
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition is maintainable in light of the availability of an alternate remedy under Maharashtra Zilla Parishad and Panchayat Samiti Rules.
Petitioner
State
Respondent Nos.2 and 3
S.V.GANGAPURWALA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court