In this review petition, the court rejected the petitioner's claim that a passing of an inconsistent stand was inapt. Accordingly, the petition was disposed of.
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.
Mlns
1
RPW/3012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
REVIEW PETITION NO. 30 OF 2012
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.75 OF 2012
Abhijeet George Gaikwad ...Petitioner Vs
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents ........
Mr.R.K.Mendadkar, advocate for petitioner. Mrs.S.S.Bhende, AGP for respondents no.1 to 4.
CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR AND
N.M. JAMDAR JJ.
DATED : 15th MARCH, 2012.
P.C.:
observation made in paragraph no.4 of our decision dated 08/02/2012 to the effect that the petitioner has taken inconsistent stand is inappropriate. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that he had argued that the petitioner's case is one of re-conversion to his original caste 'Mahaar' and not taking inconsistent stand as such. We find no force in this argument. In
any case that cannot be a ground for review. Accordingly, petition is disposed of.
N.M.JAMDAR, J.
A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.
Abhijeet George Gaikwad
State of Maharashtra
A.M.Khanwilkar
N.M.Jamdar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
