Petitioners granted liberty to submit a detailed representation to Respondent No.2 for final disposal within two months instead of immediate relief.
Petitioners granted liberty to make a detailed representation to Respondent No.2; Respondent No.2 directed to decide within two months.
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 BOMBAY AT GOA
WRIT PETITION NO. 1134 OF 2018
MHALGO RAM GAONKAR AND 12 ORS., ... Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF GOA, THR. CHIEF SECRETARY AND 2 ORS., ... Respondents
Mr. Ganesh R. Naik, Advocate for the Petitioners. Ms. P. Bhandari, Addl. Government Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. A. Kakodkar, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
Coram:M. S. SONAK & PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, JJ. Date:29th January 2019
P.C.
Heard Mr. G. Naik, learned counsel for the Petitioners, Ms. Bhandari, learned Addl. Government Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Mr. A. Kakodkar, learned counsel for Respondent No.3.
WP/1134/2018
2
directed to dispose of such a representation on its own merits and in accordance with law within a time bound schedule.
PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.
M. S. SONAK, J.
at*
MHALGO RAM GAONKAR AND 12 ORS.
STATE OF GOA, THR. CHIEF SECRETARY AND 2 ORS.
M. S. SONAK
PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
