This order disposes of a writ petition without scrutiny on merits as no cause of action had accrued by the date of the order; petitioner was directed to approach appropriate legal remedies upon accrual.
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.
wp11808.16.doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 11808 OF 2016
Muktai Bahuudeshiya Mahila Mandal, Wadoda & others
.. PETITIONERS
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others
.. RESPONDENTS
Mr. M.S. Deshmukh, advocate for petitioners. Mr. A.V. Deshmukh, AGP for the State.
=====
CORAM : R.M. BORDE & SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ. DATE : 29th NOVEMBER, 2016.
PER COURT :
As on today, according to us, there is no accrual of cause of action for the petitioner to seek any direction. We have not scrutinised the petition on its merits. It would be open for the petitioner to avail of the remedies available in law, in the event of accrual of cause of action.
With liberty as aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of.
( SANGITRAO S. PATIL ) ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
Muktai Bahuudeshiya Mahila Mandal & others
The State of Maharashtra & others
R.M. Borde
Sangitrao S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
