The High Court disposed of the writ petition primarily because the petitioner could tender a comprehensive representation to higher authorities regarding the grievance.
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.
wp199815.odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1998 OF 2015
Bhagwan s/o Babasaheb Jaikar
Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & others
Respondents
Mr.Swapnil Joshi, advocate i/by J.P.Legal Associates for the petitioner.
Mr.S.S.Tope, Government Pleader for Respondents.
CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
P.R.BORA, JJ. DATE : 25th February, 2015
PER COURT:
It would be open for the petitioner to tender a comprehensive representation pointing out his grievance to the Collector or any other higher officer and it would be the responsibility of concerned higher official to look into the grievance of the petitioner.
In view of above, writ petition stands disposed of.
P.R.BORA JUDGE
R.M.BORDE
JUDGE
adb/wp199815
Bhagwan s/o Babasaheb Jaikar
The State of Maharashtra & others
R.M. Borde
P.R. Bora
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
