Concerning a writ petition challenging appointment offer. The court observed the offer was finalized and disposed of the matter without costs.
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.
13-wp-11313-2022.doc
Pallavi
Digitally signed by PALLAVI PALLAVI MAHENDRA MAHENDRA WARGAONKAR WARGAONKAR Date: 2022.09.27 20:30:39 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.11313 OF 2022
Sagar Bhagwanrao Kadam and Anr. …Petitioners Versus
The State of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary Urban Development Dept. …Respondent
Mr. Pandit Kasar for the petitioners. Mr. M.M. Pabale, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2. Ms. Kavita N. Solunke for respondent no.3.
CORAM: DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ. & MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J. DATE: SEPTEMBER 27, 2022
P.C.:
1. Since the petitioners have been favoured with offer of appointment yesterday, nothing survives for a decision on this writ petition. The same stands disposed of without costs, with liberty to the petitioners to respond to such offer.
2. The appointment letters are marked ‘X’ for identification and shall be retained with the record.
(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
1
Sagar Bhagwanrao Kadam and Anr.
The State of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary Urban Development Dept.
Dipankar Datta
Madhav J. Jamdar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
