Writ petition for directions to decide a review application remained dismissed ex parte due to total default by the petitioner who did not appear on the hearing date.
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.
42-wp-5268-17
1/1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5268 OF 2017
Kedar Jaysingrao Patil
Vs.
The Collector and District Magistrate
Kolhapur and Ors.
..Petitioner
..Respondents
Ms. M. S. Bane, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 / State.
Ms. Rati Sinhasane i/b. U. R. Mankapure, Advocate for Respondent
No.3.
CORAM : C.V. BHADANG, J. DATE : 26th FEBRUARY, 2020
P.C.
.The only prayer in this petition is for direction to the first
respondent to decide an application for review filed by the petitioner
seeking review of the judgment and order dated 26/3/2014,
expeditiously.
2.Today, none appears for the petitioner. Even on the last date
i.e. on 12/2/2020, there was no appearance on behalf of the
petitioner. It is not known as to whether the review application of
the year 2014 is still pending. In any event, in the absence of
learned counsel for the petitioner, the petition is dismissed with no
order as to costs.
C.V. BHADANG, J.
Mamta Kale
Kedar Jaysingrao Patil
The Collector and District Magistrate Kolhapur
Ors.
C.V. BHADANG
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court