Petitioner claimed grievance was redressed by a communication from the District Collector. The High Court disposed of the writ petition without further adjudication.
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
WRIT PETITION NO. 3615 OF 2016
(Kewalbai Dattu Aurade Vs. The State of Maharashtra and
others)
Mr. Amit A. Mukhedkar, Advocate for the Petitioner
Mr. A.S. Shinde, A.G.P. for the respondent/State
Mr. K>B> Jadhavar, Advocate for respondent No. 3
Mr. N.P. Patil-Jamalpurkar, Advocate for respondent No.5
CORAM :R.M. BORDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : 8th December, 2016
PER COURT:
Heard.
2.The learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner, on instructions, states that the grievance
of the petitioner is already redressed in view of the
decision/communication issued by the District Collector,
Osmanabad. Copy of the said communication is taken on
record and marked “X” for the purpose of identification.
3.In view of above, the Writ Petition is disposed
of.
npj/wp3615-2016
2 wp3615-2016
Kewalbai Dattu Aurade
The 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