The High Court at Nagpur dismissed the writ petition after the respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding an alternate efficacious remedy before the Divisional Commissioner. The court disposed of the petition without 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 wp762.14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.762 OF 2014.
(MEENA KISHOR SHINGARE..VS..ZILLA PARISHAD, AKOLA & 4 OTH.)
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND P.R.BORA, JJ.
DATED : OCTOBER 01, 2014.
Heard.
The learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 raises a preliminary objection to the tenability of the writ petition. It is stated that the petitioner has an alternate efficacious remedy of filing an appeal before the Divisional Commissioner in view of the Government Circular dated 29th September, 2011.
Considering the disputed facts involved in this case, we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition. The petitioner is free to agitate her grievance before the Divisional Commissioner, if the petitioner so desires. The writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.
The points raised in the petition are, however, kept open.
JUDGE JUDGE
RRaut..
Meena Kishor Shingare
Zilla Parishad, Akola
Vasanti A. Naik
P. R. Bora
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
