The petitioner reported compliance with earlier directions. Finding no substantive grievance, the court disposed of the contempt petition effectively allowing it by the court.
Contempt Petition disposed of.
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.
cp31818.odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITIOIN NO.318 OF 2018 IN WRIT PETITION NO.8393 OF 2016
Dr.Nagesh s/o Dinkarrao Kulkarni
Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & others
Respondents
Mr.Anand P. Bhandari, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.S.Dande, A.G.P. for Respondents No.1 to 3.
CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
A.M.DHAVALE, JJ. DATE : 11th June, 2018
PER COURT:
Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, states that the directions, issued by this Court while disposing of the writ petition, have been complied with and as such, grievance raised in the Contempt Petition no more subsists.
Contempt Petition is, therefore, disposed of.
A.M.DHAVLE R.M.BORDE JUDGE JUDGE
adb/
Dr. Nagesh
State of Maharashtra
R.M.BORDE
A.M.DHAVALE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
