High Court of Karnataka Bench at Aurangabad disposed of Writ Petition No. 2385 of 2018, allowing petitioner alternate legal remedies while keeping such an option open before final disposal.
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.
914 sr.no..odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
914 WRIT PETITION NO. 2385 OF 2018
ANAND LAKHICHAND BHANDARI VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Rajendra S. Sadaphule AGP for Respondents: Mr. C.S. Kulkarni
. . .
CORAM : R.M. BORDE & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.
DATE : 1st March, 2018.
PER COURT:-
It would be open for the petitioner to avail the alternate remedies available in law. Keeping the option of the petitioner to avail the alternate remedies, writ petition is disposed of.
[K.K.SONAWANE, J] [R.M. BORDE, J]
grt/-
ANAND LAKHICHAND BHANDARI
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
R.M. BORDE
K.K. SONAWANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
