The single-judge bench disposed of the writ petition keeping the petitioner's option to avail alternate remedies under law open. No substantive adjudication was provided.
Industry open but no specific substantive relief granted.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
912 WRIT PETITION NO. 10921 OF 2016
ANKUSH MAHADEV BALANE AND ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. S.V. Gundre AGP for Respondents:Mr. S.B. Joshi
CORAM : R. M. BORDE & SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ. Date: November 17, 2016
PER COURT :-
1 It would be open for the petitioner to avail of remedies available in law.
2 Keeping option of the petitioner ope to avail alternate remedies available in law open, the writ petition is disposed of.
( SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J. ) ( R. M. BORDE, J. )
vbd
1 issue framed by the court
whether the writ petition should be dismissed or disposed of with an option to approach alternate remedies
ANKUSH MAHADEV BALANE
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
R. M. BORDE
SANGITRAO S. PATIL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
