A writ petitioner sought information. The High Court observed that an appropriate remedy exists under the Right to Information Act, 2005 and disposed of the petition accordingly.
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.
wp549418.odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.5494 OF 2018
Balasaheb Shankarrao Ghumare
Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra & others
Respondents
Mr.M.K.Bhosale, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.S.Dande, A.G.P. for Respondents No.1 & 3.
CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
A.M.DHAVALE, JJ. DATE : 11th June, 2018
PER COURT:
It would be open to the petitioner to avail of appropriate remedy under the Right to Information Act, 2005.
With this liberty, petition is disposed of.
A.M.DHAVLE R.M.BORDE JUDGE JUDGE
adb/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be directed to avail remedy under the Right to Information Act, 2005 for his request.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Balasaheb Shankarrao Ghumare
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
