Petitioner challenged a notice under Section 35(2) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959, asserting the committee's term had expired. The Court found the petition infructuous as the subject matter no longer survives for consideration and disposed of it accordingly.
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.
TAUSEEF LAIQUEE FAROOQUI
Digitally signed by TAUSEEF LAIQUEE FAROOQUI Date: 2023.03.24 17:16:38 +0530
Tauseef
13-WP.1111.2020.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1111 OF 2020
Vikram Parmeshwar Shinde ...Petitioner Versus The Tahsildar, Taluka Madha, Dist. Solapur & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Pandit Kasar for Petitioner. Mr. S. D. Rayrikar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 6.
Coram : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.
Date : March 23, 2023.
P. C. :
1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the subject matter of the writ petition was the notice under Section 35(2) of the Maharashtra Village Panchayat Act, 1959 and as the term of the committee is already over, nothing survives further for consideration.
2. Writ Petition stands disposed of as infructuous.
[Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]
1 of 1
Vikram Parmeshwar Shinde
The Tahsildar, Taluka Madha, Dist. Solapur
SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court