Petitioner granted permission to withdraw the writ petition in favor of an alternate revision remedy. Petition disposed of as withdrawn.
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.
WP7176-14
1
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 7176/2014
(GANESH NETARAM BOPCHE VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders
Court's or Judge's orders
Shri A.M. Sudame, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rohit Deo, A.S.G.I. for the respondents.
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND
A.M. BADAR, JJ. DATE : APRIL 24, 2015.
Heard.
Shri Deo, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondents, raises a preliminary objection to the tenability of the writ petition. It is stated that the petitioner has an alternate remedy of filing a revision under Rule 29 of the C.R.P.F. rules, 1955.
Shri Sudame, the learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the petitioner would avail the alternate remedy and he may be permitted to withdraw the writ petition.
Permission is granted.
The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn.
The points raised in the petition are kept open.
If the revision is filed by the petitioner within a period
of fifteen days, the Revisional Authority should decide the same on merits.
JUDGE JUDGE
APTE
Ganesh Netaram Bopche
The Union of India
Vasanti A. Naik
A.M. Badar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
