The writ petition was disposed of formally as not pressed. The court recorded the petitioner's instruction not to continue with the matter and made no substantive ruling.
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.
37-wp-5507-12.sxw
1
dgm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 5507 OF 2012
Emmanuel Marks Chougule .... Petitioner vs State of Maharashtra & ors. .... Respondents
Ms. Pavitra Manesh i/by Mr. M. S. Topkar for the petitioner.
Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, AGP for respondents 1 and 3.
CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.
DATE : September 12, 2012
P.C.:
The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, referring to a letter marked “X”, and taken on record for identification purposes, submits that as per the instructions, as the Petitioner do not want to continue with the matter, the Petition can be disposed of accordingly.
(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
Emmanuel Marks Chougule
State of Maharashtra
Anoop V. Mohta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
