The petitioner appeared in support of the petition and sought to withdraw a contempt petition filed on an erroneous impression. The court allowed the withdrawal and disposed of the contempt petition accordingly.
Contempt petition was allowed to be withdrawn and disposed of accordingly.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.
766.18cp
( 1 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO.766 OF 2018 IN
WRIT PETITION NO.2708 OF 2009
Shriram s/o Anandrao Shinde
PETITIONER
VERSUS
The Aurangabad Municipal Corporation
Through its Municipal Commissioner,
Aurangabad Mr Vinayak Nipun & ors
RESPONDENTS
Mr K.C. Sant, Advocate for the petitioner;
Ms Rashi P. Gour, A.G.P. for respondent/State;
Mrs Manjusha A. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent Nos. 4
& 6
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE &
R.G. AVACHAT, JJ.
DATED :19th JULY, 2019
ORAL ORDER:
Mr. Sant, learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioner, on the instructions of petitioner, who
himself is present in this Court, submitted that on an
erroneous impression present contempt petition was filed
and he be permitted to withdraw the petition.
2.As a statement is made on instructions of the
petitioner, who himself is present in this Court, the
contempt petition is allowed to be withdrawn and disposed
of accordingly.
Tupe
Shriram s/o Anandrao Shinde
The Aurangabad Municipal Corporation
Prasanna B. Varale
R.G. Avachat
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court