The Delhi High Court adjourned the matter, hearing the applicant and original petitioners, and extended the time for the decision by two months.
Time for decision extended by two months from the date of order.
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.
901
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
901 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.7142 OF 2020
IN WP/9954/2018
MAHATMA PHULE KRISHI VIDYAPEETH THR ITS REGISTRAR
VERSUS RAVINDRA KESHAV HARISHACHANDRE AND OTHERS
Advocate for Applicant : Mr Shahane Pradeep L. AGP for Respondents State: Mr P. S. Patil Advocate for original petitioners: Mr. Rahub B. Temak
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ. DATE : 5th January, 2021
ORDER :
upon the grievance of the petitioners as per the directions of this Court dated 19.11.2019 in Writ Petition No. 9954 of 2018.
(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)
JPC
Page 1 of 1
MAHATMA PHULE KRISHI VIDYAPEETH THR ITS REGISTRAR
RAVINDRA KESHAV HARISHACHANDRE AND OTHERS
S. V. GANGAPURWALA
SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
