Satish Purushottam Paseband v. State Of Mah.Thr.Secty. And 3 Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION W. NO.150/2012 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2687/2001 Satish s/o Purushottam Paseband ...Versus...

State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and others - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri M.V. Mohokar, Advocate for petitioner Shri N.S. Rao, AGP for respondent no.1 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.

DATE : 25.01.2016 Heard.

Perused the proposed amendment and the reply to the amendment application. Since the proposed amendment does not change the nature of the petition, the petitioner is permitted to amend the writ petition. The amendment should be carried out within a period of two weeks.

The civil application is allowed and disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Wadkar