The bench disposed of the writ petition as elections were concluded and grievance redressal via alternate remedies was available; no costs awarded.
Writ petition disposed of with no costs awarded.
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.
910 sr. no. 5510wp.odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5510 OF 2015
SWAMI PURNANAND MAJUR SAHKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT, DHULEAND OTHERS VERSUS DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE ELECTION OFFICER @ DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, DHULE AND OTH
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. M.S. Deshmukh AGP for Respondents: Mr. B.V. Virdhe.
CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ. DATE :19TH JULY , 2016.
PER COURT:
1] Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned counsel for respondent No.4 and learned AGP.
2] It appears that pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, petitioners have exercised their right of franchise. Elections are also over and elected candidates have also assumed charge. If any of the parties have any grievance about the elections, they have alternate remedy. In the light of that, writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
[K.K. SONAWANE] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA] JUDGE JUDGE.
grt/-
SWAMI PURNANAND MAJUR SAHKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT, DHULE AND OTHERS
DISTRICT CO OPERATIVE ELECTION OFFICER @ DISTRICT DEPUTY REGISTRAR, DHULE AND OTH
S.V. GANGAPURWALA
K.K. SONAWANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
