Anil Annasaheb Tanpure And ANR v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 217 OF 2010 IN RAST/17703/2008 WITH RAST/17703/2008 IN WP 290/2008 ANIL ANNASAHEB TANPURE AND ANR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS ...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Kalyan Patil h/f Mr. S R Barlinge AGP for Respondents 1,3 : Mr. U S Mote Advocate for Respondent 2 : Mr. A.M.Karad.

Advocate for Respondent 4 :Mr Satish A Gaikwad ...

CORAM : A.V. NIRGUDE & V.K. JADHAV, JJ.

Dated: January 05, 2015 ...

PER COURT :- 1.

Delay is condoned. Application for review is taken up for hearing.

2.

Heard.

3.

The order which is sought to be reviewed reads as under :

"We do not find any merits in the matter.

The petitioner has been rightly punished for failure to supply information under the Right to Information Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no opportunity was given to the petitioner to defend before imposing punishment. We do not find it to be so.

Petition is dismissed."

aaa/-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 4.

This order was passed long back in the year 2008 by another Bench of this Court. Both learned members of the Bench are now retired. The order clearly indicates that, the Court heard the case on merits and upheld the impugned order. If we allow this review, it would virtually amount to re-hearing of the petition from beginning. We are not expected to undertake such course of action. Review Application is dismissed.

( V.K. JADHAV, J. ) ( A.V. NIRGUDE, J. ) ...

aaa/-