Sarang Dnyanoba Mate And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5594 OF 2016 SARANG DNYANOBA MATE AND ORS.

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OR.

....

CORAM : T.V. NALAWADE, J.

DATED : 30th August, 2016.

ORDER :

1.

Learned counsel Shri. A.A. Shelke submitted that he was appearing for objection petitioner and intimation was not given to him by the learned counsel for petitioner. This Court has already made observations against Advocate Shri. Suryawanshi as he has signed as an advocate, who identified the objection petitioner in reply affidavit. This single circumstance shows that Society had joined hands with the objection petitioner, respondent No. 6. It is unbecoming on the part of counsel because Society is expected to act impartially, but the conduct of these two advocates show that they were not acting fairly. They together did everything to see that the decision of the writ petition is protracted.

2.

During speaking to minutes, hearing was given to learned counsel for Society and due to this circumstance this Court holds that there is no need to rehear the matter though submission is made by the learned counsel for objection petitioner that intimation was not given to him by the learned counsel for petitioner. Motion is disposed of. [ T.V. NALAWADE, J. ] ssc/