The writ petition was dismissed for want of prosecution as the petitioner's counsel stated that the petitioner was not giving instructions despite being served notice.
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.
wp2545.13
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 2545 of 2013
(Laxman S/o Vishwanath Parhad Vs. State of Mah. Through its Secretary, Dept. of Revenue and ors.)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders
Shri Patil, Advocate for petitioner Shri A. S. Fulzele, AGP for respondents
CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & S. B. SHUKRE, JJ.
DATE : 27-3-2015.
Seen Pursis Stamp No. 13349/2014.
Learned Advocate Shri Patil states that the petitioner is not giving any instructions though he is served with Registered Post Acknowledgment Due notice.
Learned AGP appears for the respondents. As such, writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
JUDGE JUDGE
wasnik
...../-
Laxman S/o Vishwanath Parhad
State of Mah. Through its Secretary, Dept. of Revenue and ors.
B.P. Dharmadhikari
S. B. Shukre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
