Petitioner challenged the declaration of an election programme. The bench held there was no error in the impugned order under Article 226 and dismissed the petition.
Petition dismissed.
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.
wp4102.15.sxw
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4102 OF 2015
Shri Suresh Ningappa Karajgi ... Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents
Mr. A.D. Sale for the petitioner. Mr. P.G. Sawant, AGP for the State.
CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND S.B. SHUKRE, JJ .
9th October, 2015 .
P.C.
Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the record and considered the submissions advanced. We do not find any error in the impugned order passed. The election programme is declared.
(S.B. SHUKRE, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)
L.S. Panjwani, P.S.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether extraordinary writ jurisdiction is warranted to interfere with the election programme declaration.
Suresh Ningappa Karajgi
The State of Maharashtra
NARESH H. PATIL
S.B. SHUKRE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
