Petitioner challenged the numbering of row-houses. Court found numbering followed MHADA Circular dated 7th December 2009. Exercising jurisdiction under Article 226, Court declined to interfere and dismissed the petition.
Dismissal of the Writ Petition.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 767 OF 2017
Sachin Prakash Amale. ..Petitioner. Versus State of Maharashtra & Others. ..Respondents.
Mr. G. B. Walawalkar for the Petitioner. Ms. Nisha Mehra, AGP for the Respondent-State. Mr. P. G. Lad and Aparna Murlidharan, Ms. Sayli Apte for Respondent No. 2 and 3. Ms. Chaitrali Deshmukh for Respondent No. 6.
Coram : Ranjit More & Smt. S. S. Jadhav, JJ. Date : April 12, 2018 .
P. C. :
[Smt. S. S. JADHAV, J.]
[RANJIT MORE, J.]
1 / 1
patilsr
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this Court should interfere with the numbering of row-houses given as per MHADA policy.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sachin Prakash Amale
State of Maharashtra
Respondent No. 2
Respondent No. 3
Respondent No. 6
Ranjit More
S. S. Jadhav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
