Review petition filed by the Union of India against an order restricting a Haj Committee member. The High Court held the review was misconceived as it did not cover the apprehended issues.
The review petition was dismissed as entirely misconceived.
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.
904-RPWL.41.2016.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
REVIEW PETITION (L) NO. 41 OF 2016 IN
WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 1357 OF 2016
Union of India } Petitioner versus Ibrahim Gulam Nabi Shaikh } and Ors. } Respondents
Mr. Anil Singh – Additional Solicitor General with Mr. Sandesh Patil, Mr.Dhanesh R. Shah and Mr. D. P. Singh for the petitioner.
Mr. Hiralal Thacker – Senior Advocate with Mr. Joseph Fernandes for respondent no. 1.
Mr. Umashankar Upadhyay – AGP for respondent no. 2.
CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI &
DR. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ. DATED :- OCTOBER 4, 2016
P.C. :- (In Chamber)
petitioner/respondent no. 1. We have perused the review petition and the order under review.
Page 1 of 2
J.V.Salunke,PA
904-RPWL.41.2016.doc
Page 2 of 2
J.V.Salunke,PA
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Union of India
Ibrahim Gulam Nabi Shaikh
Others
S. C. Dharadhihari
Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
