Court disposed of a contempt petition finding it purged after the proposal rejection order was complied with, while noting the petitioner's right to challenge said order judicially.
The contempt petition is disposed of; no costs awarded.
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.
1 cp 76.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 76 OF 2016 IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 3281 OF 2013
Osmanabad Zilla Samaj Seva Mandal Osmanabad Through Its Secretary .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Shri Pratap G. Rodge, Advocate for the Petitioner. Ms. Vaishali N. Patil, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND K. L. WADANE, JJ. DATE : 24TH NOVEMBER, 2016.
PER COURT :
. The learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that, the proposal of the petitioner is rejected.
[ K. L. WADANE, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/Nov. 16
Osmanabad Zilla Samaj Seva Mandal Osmanabad
The State of Maharashtra
S. V. GANGAPURWALA
K. L. WADANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
