The High Court of Bombay held that the petitioner's grievance was already redressed. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without any further adjudication on the merits.
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.
940 WRIT PETITION NO. 3533 OF 2016
NAMDEO RAMCHANDRA KADU VERSUS
SHRI KAI SATYAHIVEL KUMARSAMI AND ANOTHER
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. C.V. Thombre AGP for Respondents: Mr. M.B. Bharswadkar
... CORAM : R. M. BORDE & K.L. WADANE, JJ. Date: August 03, 2016
PER COURT :-
1 On perusal of the papers, it appears that the grievance of the petitioner is already redressed. If at all any fresh cause accrues, it would be open for the petitioner to take appropriate remedial measures.
( K.L. WADANE, J. ) ( R. M. BORDE, J. )
vbd
Namdeo Ramchandra Kadu
Shri Kai Satyahivel Kumarsami
R. M. Borde
K.L. Wadane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
