The petitioners withdrew their Writ Petition after the grievance was met by the impugned order passed by the Respondent No.1. The court disposed of the petition accordingly.
The Writ Petition is 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.
wp251517.odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2515 OF 2017
Suhas s/o Sadashivrao Inamdar & others
Petitioners
Versus
The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Parbhani & another
Respondents
Mr.Avinash S. Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioners. Mr.N.B.Suryawanshi, Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mrs.M.A.Deshpande, AGP for Respondent No.2.
CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL, C.J. & N.M. JAMDAR, J. DATE : 13th December, 2018
PER COURT:
Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners placed on record a copy of the order passed by Respondent No.1, which is taken on record and marked “X” for identification. It is stated that grievance of the petitioners is met and they do not want to press the petition.
Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
N.M.JAMDAR, J. CHIEF JUSTICE
adb/
Suhas s/o Sadashivrao Inamdar & others
The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Parbhani & another
NARESH H. PATIL
N.M. JAMDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
