Petitioner filed a writ petition. The High Court held that an alternate remedy was available. Consequently, the petition did not require consideration and was disposed of without any discussion on merits.
Writ petition disposed of without considering merits due to availability of alternate remedy.
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.
902 WRIT PETITION NO. 14083 OF 2017
GAJANAN SHANKARRAO SONWANE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. G.V. Mohekar AGP for Respondents: Mr. S.B. Joshi
CORAM : R. M. BORDE & VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ. Date: December 05, 2017
PER COURT :-
1 In view of availability of alternate remedy for redressal of grievances of the petitioner, instant petition need not be considered.
( VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ) ( R. M. BORDE, J. )
vbd
GAJANAN SHANKARRAO SONWANE
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
R. M. BORDE
VIBHA KANKANWADI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
