Petitioner sought direction to decide a pending revision without notice to other respondents. Court disposed of petition by directing Respondent No.9 to decide the revision within 8 weeks.
Directed Respondent No.9 to decide the revision within 8 weeks from the date of presentation of this 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.
26-WP-9421-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.9421 OF 2024
Arun Bapu Shivale … Petitioner V/s.
Amol Vishnu Shivale and Ors. … Respondents
Mr. Drupad Patil a/w Mr. Ajinkya Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. Hamid Mulla, AGP for State-Respondent No.9.
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATED : 8TH JULY 2024
P.C.:
(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
1
Sharada
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a direction to the State to decide a pending revision within a timeframe is warranted without issuing notice to other respondents.
Arun Bapu Shivale
Amol Vishnu Shivale and Ors.
AVINASH G. GHAROTE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
