The High Court dismissed the writ petition as the petitioner's pensionary grievance no longer survives because it was settled during the petition's pendency.
Petition dismissed as it has been rendered infructuous due to settlement of the claim.
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 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2165 OF 2015
Pandharinath S. Payghan. Versus State of Maharashtra & Others.
..Petitioner.
..Respondents.
Mr. G. S. Hiranandai i/b C. G. Gavnekar for the Petitioner. Mr. V. M. Mali, AGP for the State.
Coram : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. Date : July 22, 2016 .
P. C. :
[SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.]
[RANJIT MORE, J.]
1 / 1
patilsr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition regarding the petitioner's pensionary claim survives given that the claim has been settled during its pendency.
Pandharinath S. Payghan
State of Maharashtra
RANJIT MORE
ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
