The High Court held that no grievance remained as the prior order was complied with. The contempt petitions were disposed of with no substantive issue requiring resolution beyond the statement of compliance.
Contempt petitions 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
901 CONT. PETITION NO.479 OF 2018
IN WP/5694/2015 WITH CP/487/2018 IN WP/5691/2015
WITH CP/464/2019 IN WP/6234/2015 WITH CP/465/2019
IN WP/5689/2015 WITH CP/466/2019 IN WP/5693/2015
INDUBAI ABASAHEB BHISE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Manoj Patil h/f
Mr.Shinde Chandrakant K.
AGP for Respondents: Ms. A.V. Gondhalekar
...
CORAM: PRASANNA B. VARALE AND R.G. AVACHAT, JJ.
DATED : 16th JULY, 2019.
ORAL ORDER:
Advocate Mr. Patil h/f Mr. Shinde, counsel for
the petitioners, submits before us that the order
passed by this Court is complied with and no
grievance of the petitioners is remained to be
redressed.
2. Nothing more survives in the petitions.
3. Accordingly the Contempt Petitions are disposed of.
Indubai Abasaheb Bhise and Others
State of Maharashtra and Others
PRASANNA B. VARALE
R.G. AVACHAT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court