Bombay High CourtCAW/2451/2015rejected at admission stage

Satish Purushottam Paseband v. State Of Maharashtra Thorugh Its Secretary, Urban Devlopment Deptt.,

2016-01-06Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.A. Naik,Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.S. Chandurkar1 pages

WP2687-01 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR C.A.W. NO.2451/2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2687/2001 (SATISH PURUSHOTTAM PASEBAND VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & 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, counsel for the petitioner. Shri N.S. Rao, A.G.P. for the R-1.

Shri S. Wahane, counsel for the R-5.

CORAM : SMT.VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.

DATE : JANUARY 6 , 2016.

The prayer made in the civil application cannot be granted. The person against whom the relief is sought, is not a party to the writ petition. In fact, it is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the person against whom the interim direction is sought is not a necessary party to the writ petition. The relief as sought by the petitioner cannot be granted in the aforesaid circumstances. The civil application stands rejected with costs.

JUDGE JUDGE APTE