Petitioner's grievance in a writ petition became untenable after respondents sanctioned his construction proposal. The court disposed of the writ petition and related civil application without costs.
Writ petition and connected civil application disposed of; no costs awarded.
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)
1080-wp-8422-2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 1080 WRIT PETITION NO. 8422 OF 2016 WITH CA/446/2018 IN WP/8422/2016
GANPATRAO EKNATHRAO NARWAD..PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS..RESPONDENTS
Mr. Ramesh V. Naiknavare, Advocate for the
Petitioner.
Mr. N. T. Bhatat, AGP for Respondents-State.
Mr. Krishna K. Kulkarni, Advocate for Respondent
No.4.
… CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ. DATED : 26th JULY, 2018.
PER COURT:-
1.Mr. Naiknavare, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that after filing of the present
petition, the respondents have sanctioned the
proposal of the petitioner for construction.
2.In view of that, the grievance of the
petitioner does not survive. Writ Petition as such
is disposed of. No costs.
3.In view of disposal of writ petition,
civil application also stands disposed of.
Devendra/July-18
GANPATRAO EKNATHRAO NARWAD
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
S. V. GANGAPURWALA
SUNIL K. KOTWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court