Devidas S/O Bhauraoji Deshmukh v. Mr. S.N. Dutonde Administrator Ashok Shikshan Sanstha And Others

wp6403.12

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR

BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 6403 of 2012 (Devidas s/o Bhauraoji Deshmukh Vs. Mr. S. N. Dutonde, the Administrator (Ashok Shikshan Sanstha, Ashok Nagar, Tah. Dhamangaon Rly., Distt. Amravati)/Superintendent of the office of Joint Charity Commissioner, Amravati and ors.) .......................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................... Shri M. M. Agnihotri, Advocate for petitioner Shri Bhangde, Advocate for respondent no. 3 Shri T. R. Kankale, AGP for respondent nos. 2 and 5

CORAM

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

DATE : FEBRUARY 9, 2015.

Matter was called out in morning.

Learned Advocate Shri Agnihotri informed that the petitioner has handed over a pursis to him in Court seeking withdrawal of writ petition. He sought adjournment till afternoon to obtain instructions from the petitioner.

In the afternoon, learned Advocate Shri Agnihotri informs that he had a talk with petitioner. He also informs that matter should have been fought on merits and the petitioner for certain unknown reasons, is seeking its withdrawal. Learned counsel, therefore, prays for his discharge from the petition. Accordingly, .....2/-

wp6403.12 learned Advocate Shri Agnihotri is discharged from the petition.

The petitioner is present in person. He is identified by Advocate Shri Agnihotri. Petitioner was asked whether he wanted to continue with the matter and he stated that he wants to withdraw the writ petition. Reasons given by him is financial problems. He was also asked whether there is any pressure from other side to which he answered in negative and submits that he is withdrawing the petition with free volition. Learned AGP appears for respondent nos.

2 and 5.

In this situation without going into any controversy, as petitioner is unwilling to prosecute the matter, we dismissed it for want of prosecution.

Pending civil applications are also disposed of.

JUDGE JUDGE wasnik ...../-