The High Court expressed no inclination to issue directions as prayed. The petitioner was advised to approach the Government instead. Both the Writ Petition and Civil Application were disposed of on this account.
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
WRIT PETITION NO.3681 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.11098 OF 2014
Rahul s/o Harichandra Sapkal & ors.
... PETITIONERS
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... RESPONDENTS
Shri Pradeep Deshmukh, Advocate holding for Ms Sudha S. Chintamani - Kulthe, Advocate for petitioners Shri M.M. Nerlikar, A.G.P. for State
CORAM: T.V. NALAWADE AND SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.
DATED : 5th APRIL, 2018.
ORAL ORDER :
( SUNIL K. KOTWAL ) ( T.V. NALAWADE ) JUDGE JUDGE
fmp/
Rahul s/o Harichandra Sapkal & ors.
The State of Maharashtra & ors.
T.V. NALAWADE
SUNIL K. KOTWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
