This court disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner had no legal entitlement to claim back land acquired in 1966; he was permitted to participate in subsequent leasing proceedings.
Writ petition disposed of with liberty to participate in the leasing proceedings.
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.
wp7347.12.doc
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 7347 OF 2012
Pandharinath s/o Namdeorao Shitole
.. PETITIONER
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others
.. RESPONDENTS
Mr. A.A. Mukhedkar, advocate for petitioner. Mr. P.S. Patil, AGP for the State.
=====
CORAM : R.M. BORDE & A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ. DATE : 7th JANUARY, 2016.
PER COURT :
wp7347.12.doc
2
is called for in the writ petition. With liberty as aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of.
( A.I.S. CHEEMA ) ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be disposed of without interfering as the petitioner has no legal entitlement to claim back the acquired land but can participate in the leasing proceedings.
Pandharinath s/o Namdeorao Shitole
The State of Maharashtra
R.M. BORDE
A.I.S. CHEEMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
