The petitioner sought direction to release salary and departmental action. The court noted that the main grievance regarding salary arrears was satisfied as they had been paid. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without adjudicating other aspects.
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.
15.1WP.1395.14
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 1395 OF 2014. (Hemantkumar s/o Rambhau Bhagat .vs. State of Maharashtra & others)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.
Mr. S.S. Dhengale, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. M.K. Pathan, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 & 2, Mr. Amol Deshpande, Advocate for respondent nos. 4 & 5. Dr. Mrs. R.S. Sirpurkar, Advocate for respondent no.7.
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATED : JANUARY 15, 2016.
The petitioner has filed various petitions including for direction to release the salary and also for taking departmental action against the respondent nos. 3 to 7.
During the pendency of the petition, the main grievance, i.e. for direction to pay the salary no more survives, inasmuch as all the arrears have been paid to the petitioner.
Since the main grievance of the petitioner stands satisfied, we do not find it necessary to look into other aspects of the matter.
The Writ Petition is disposed of.
Judge
Judge J.
Hemantkumar
State of Maharashtra
B.R. GAVAI
P.N. DESHMUKH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
