← Library
Bombay High CourtCA/395/2021disposed off

The Ex. Engineer, Minor Irrigation Div. No. 1 Aurangabad Thr Gmidc, Aurangabad v. Madhukar Punju Patil And ORS

2021-01-08Hon'Ble Shri Justice M. G. Sewlikar3 pages

- 1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

(1) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 395 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2148 OF 2020 Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division No. 1., Aurangabad Applicant

Versus

Madhukar Punju Patil & others Respondents WITH

(2) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 397 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2181 OF 2020 WITH

(3) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 398 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2179 OF 2020 WITH

(4) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 400 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2174 OF 2020 WITH

(5) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 401 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2177 OF 2020 WITH

(6) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 405 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2149 OF 2020 WITH

(7) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 403 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2150 OF 2020 WITH

(8) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 407 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2183 OF 2020 WITH

(9) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 396 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2180 OF 2020 WITH

(10) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 399 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.2194 OF 2020 WITH

(11) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 402 OF 2021 IN

- 2 - FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 14818 OF 2020 WITH

(12) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 404 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2182 OF 2020 WITH

(13) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 406 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2172 OF 2020 WITH

(14) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 408 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2192 OF 2020 WITH

(15) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 409 OF 2021 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 2191 OF 2020 WITH

(16) CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8697 OF 2020 IN FIRST APPEAL ST. NO. 14596 OF 2020 Mr. S.G. Bhalerao, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. B.V. Virdhe, AGP for respondent-State.

Mr. Adgaonkar, Advocate holding for Mr. V.B. Patil, Advocate for respondent-claimant/s.

CORAM : M.G. Sewlikar, J.

DATE : 8th January, 2021.

PER COURT :

1.

Heard both the sides.

2.

Learned counsel Shri Adgaonkar holding for Shri Viay Patil, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 has no objection for transposition as respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the SLAO and the State.

- 3 - 3.

In view of this, application is allowed in terms of prayer clause 'B'.

4.

Application is accordingly disposed of.

( M. G. SEWLIKAR ) JUDGE dyb