This small order records a representation by the First Respondent promising to decide the petition within four weeks, leading to the dismissal of certain prayer clauses and the case being disposed of without further relief.
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.
1
wp-5002.16
sng
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5002 OF 2016
Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court’s Court’s or orders or directions & Judge’s orders. Registrar’s orders.
Shri L.R. Shukla i/b MKS Legal Associates for the Petitioner. Shri D.A. Nalawade for the Respondent No.1.
Shri Rajeev Carvello along with Shri Kunal Damle i/b ICE Legal for the Respondent No.2.
CORAM : A.S. OKA & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ DATED : 16TH JANUARY 2017
P.C.:
. Learned counsel appearing for the first
Respondent on instructions states that the first Respondent will decide the representation dated 13th October 2015 made by the Petitioner within a period of four weeks from today. We accept the said statement.
2
wp-5002.16
sng
prayer clauses (c) and (d) are not considered on the ground that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued against the second and third Respondents.
(SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J) (A.S.OKA, J)
Petitioner
First Respondent
Second Respondent
Third Respondent
A.S. OKA
ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court