This reply (W.P. No. 6936 of 2017) rejected the petitioner's claim regarding payment to a private individual for a petroleum outlet allotment.
No relief was granted; the writ petition stands rejected.
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}
wp6936.17.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 6936 OF 2017
Amol / Ashitosh s/o Eknath Supekar
Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India & another
Respondents
Mr. D.R. Jayabhar, advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.B. Deshpande, ASG for respondent no. 1.
CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
S.M. GAVHANE, JJ. DATE : 8th AUGUST, 2017
PER COURT:
Petitioner is not in a position to point out the letter of allotment of retail petrol outlet issued by the petroleum company. It appears that petitioner has paid certain amount to private individual who has extended assurance to the petitioner in respect of allotment of petroleum outlet.
It would be appropriate for the petitioner to approach appropriate authority as regards his grievance of payment of amount to certain private individual. No relief as claimed by petitioner in the petition can be granted. Writ petition is devoid of substance hence stands rejected.
( S.M. GAVHANE ) ( R.M.BORDE ) JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
Amol s/o Eknath Supekar
The Union of India
R.M. Borde
S.M. Gavhane
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
