Petitioner challenged the State's inaction. Court upheld the view that since a notice was issued to the fourth respondent and matter is under review, no further relief is required. Petition disposed of.
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.
WP 781 of 2023
Santosh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
WRIT PETITION NO.781 OF 2023
SUTEJ GURUDAS POKLE Versus
STATE OF GOA THR CHIEF SECRETARY AND 3 ORS
... PETITIONER
... RESPONDENTS
Ms Apeksha Kalokhe, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr D.J. Pangam, Advocate General with Mr Neehal Vernekar, Addl. Govt. Advocate for Respondents No.1 to 3.
CORAM:- M. S. SONAK & VALMIKI SA MENEZES, JJ.
DATED :- 5th December, 2023
P.C.:
VALMIKI SA MENEZES, J.
M. S. SONAK, J.
SANTOSH S Digitally signed by SANTOSH S MHAMAL Page 1 of 1 MHAMAL Date: 2023.12.05 19:41:28 +05'30' 5th December, 2023
SUTEJ GURUDAS POKLE
STATE OF GOA
CHIEF SECRETARY
M. S. SONAK
VALMIKI SA MENEZES
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
