The High Court at Aurangabad dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable in light of an alternative statutory remedy available under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code.
Disposed of with liberty to avail alternative remedy; no costs.
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 wp 510.14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 510 OF 2014
Madhukar Gopal Mathekar .. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Shri S. D. Kotkar, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri V. P. Kadam, A.G.P. for Respondents/State.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 20TH JANUARY, 2014.
PER COURT :
. The learned A. G. P. raises a preliminary objection that the petitioner has remedy U/Sec. 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code.
[ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]
bsb/Jan. 14
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be considered on merits or remitted to an alternative statutory remedy.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Madhukar Gopal Mathekar
State of Maharashtra
S. V. Gangapurwala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
