Sanjay S/O Maniram Thakare v. Zilla Parishad, Through Its Chief Executive Officer, Gondia And 2 Others

caw2111 & 3113.14

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR

BENCH, NAGPUR.

Civil Application (CAW) Nos. 2111 and 3113 of 2014 in WRIT PETITION NO. 950 of 2014 (Sanjay s/o Maniram Thakre Vs. Zilla Parishad, Gondia through its C.E.O. and ors.) .......................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................... Smt. Neeta Jog, Advocate for petitioner Shri A. Y. Kapgate, Advocate for respondent nos. 1 and 2 Shri R. D. Khade, Advocate for applicant in CAW 2111/14 Shri Gadkari, Advocate for applicant in CAW 3113/14

CORAM

: B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & A.P.BHANGALE, JJ.

DATE : FEBRUARY 9, 2015.

As learned counsel for the petitioner fairly gives no objection, applications are allowed. The applicants be shown as respondent no. 4 onwards in Writ Petition No. 950/2014.

Necessary amendment be carried out by the petitioner within one week.

Copies of writ petition be served upon the added respondents. Added respondents to file reply, if any, within one week thereafter.

.....2/-

caw2111 & 3113.14 Shri Kapgate, learned counsel submits that a fraudulent document has been used and this Court has been mislead, hence action under Article 215 of the Constitution of India is necessary. Shri Gadkari, learned counsel submits that on the same ground, his client has also moved an application under Section 195.

Respective counsel submit that in view of fraudulent document produced on record, writ petition should not be heard.

We keep their objections open. List the writ petition along with other civil applications after three weeks.

JUDGE JUDGE wasnik ...../-