A twoman Bench disposed of a contempt petition after the respondent submitted that the petitioner had been appointed as a police constable in compliance with the impugned order, admitting the grievance had no more survived.
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.
628.19cp
( 1 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 628 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.8282 OF 2018
Sayyad Asad Sayyad Nizam
PETITIONER
VERSUS
Vishwas Pandhre, Superintendent of Police Dhule
RESPONDENT
Mr Indraneel S. Godsay, Advocate h/f Mr Avinash Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr K.N. Lokhande, A.G.P. for respondent sole
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.
DATED : 3rd JANUARY, 2020
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Mr. Indraneel Godsay, learned Counsel
holding for Mr. Avinash S. Deshmukh, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.
affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondent through Mr.V.D. Pandhare, Superintendent of Police, Dhule. Learned A.G.P. then invited our attention to the
copy of the order placed on record annexed to the affidavit in reply to submit that the petitioner is now appointed as police constable and this appointment of the petitioner is subject to certain conditions. Learned A.G.P., thus, submits that the order of this Court is now duly complied with.
enough to admit the submissions of learned A.G.P. that
the order of this Court is duly complied with and the grievance of the petitioner no more survives. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of.
[ANIL S. KILOR, J.] [PRASANNA B. VARALE,J.]
Tupe
Sayyad Asad Sayyad Nizam
Vishwas Pandhre
Prasanna B. Varale
Anil S. Kilor
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
