In a contempt petition challenging non-compliance of directions, the Court found the directions were complied with as the relevant authority disposed of the petitioner's representation. Consequently, the contempt petition was 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.
C.P.475/2018
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.475 OF 2018 IN
WRIT PETITION NO.4060 OF 2017
Dashrath s/o Govind Pawar
..Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and ors.
..Respondents
Mr N.B. Patekar, Advocate for petitioner Mr S.M. Ganachari, A.G.P. for respondents No. 1 to 5
CORAM : R.M. BORDE AND
A.M. DHAVALE, JJ.
DATE : 16th July 2018
PER COURT
no.3 and in paragraph 9 of the reply, it is stated thus :
"9. I say and submit that, the Additional Collector, Ahmednagar after taking into consideration the facts and documents on record, the report submitted by Tahsildar, Akole, the pendency of the Civil Suit and the revenue proceeding in respect of land survey no. 12/1 situated at Kalas (kh) Tal. Akole has decided the representation of the petitioner on 11.07.2018 and pleased to reject the same in view of the pendency of Civil Suit and Revenue proceeding in respect of the land in question".
C.P.475/2018
2
( A.M. DHAVALE, J.)
( R.M. BORDE, J.)
vvr
Dashrath s/o Govind Pawar
The 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
