The court disposed of the writ petition based on a statement of counsel that the grievance was redressed in a similar fact case.
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.
WP246-15
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 246/2015
(VIJAY MADHUKAR CHAUDHARY & OTHERS VERSUS STATE OF MAH. & OTHERS)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders
Court's or Judge's orders
Shri S.J. Khandalkar, counsel for the petitioners. Mrs K.R. Deshpande, A.G.P. for the R-1 to 3.
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 21, 2015.
The learned counsel for the petitioners makes a statement that in the similar facts of the instant petition in Writ Petition No.2015 of 2014, the grievance of the petitioner has been redressed and it is submitted that the facts in the present case and the said writ petition are identical.
In that view of the matter, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent nos.2 and 3 to consider the grievances of the petitioners and pass appropriate orders in that regard after following the due procedure prescribed by law. The same shall be done within a period of three months from today. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
APTE
VIJAY MADHUKAR CHAUDHARY & OTHERS
STATE OF MAH.
B.R. GAVAI
MRIDULA BHATKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
