Civil Application seeking restoration of a Writ Petition dismissed for non-removal of office objections; applicant's advocate repeatedly absent. The Court dismissed the Civil Application for non-prosecution.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
935 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1353 OF 2024 IN WP/14530/2023 Balasaheb Suryakantrao Ambore ….Applicant VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others …..Respondents
Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, AGP for the State. Mr. S. R. Yadav-Lonikar, Advocate for Respondent No. 2.
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND R. M. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 23rd FEBRUARY, 2024.
PER COURT :
Advocate for the Applicant, we had passed an order dated 2nd February, 2024, which reads as under :-
1. On 30.11.2023, though the learned Advocate for the Petitioner was absent, we had issued notice in the Writ Petition, in view of the cause raised.
2. Today, the Civil Application is before us seeking restoration. The Writ Petition was dismissed for non removal of Office objections. Today also, the learned Advocate is not present.
ca1353.24.odt
3. We find that this is not a good practice for a lawyer to remain absent in Court proceedings believing that the Court will proceed to pass an appropriate order in his absence. We are listing this Civil Application on 09.02.2024, in the urgent orders category for passing dismissal order.
for non-prosecution.
( R. M. JOSHI) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE) JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
Balasaheb Suryakantrao Ambore
The State of Maharashtra
Ravindra V. Ghuge
R. M. Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
