Abhishek S/O Dipak Gayki vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1877 Bom

                                                                                 903-wp mca- (review) 19-21.odt
                                                           1/2



                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                             NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

               MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (Review) NO. 19                                      OF       2021

                       Abhishek Dipak Gayaki -Vs- State of Maharashtra and ors.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders                                   Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Ms.   Shweta S.Pardhy, counsel for the applicant.
                                       Mr.   Anand Parchure, counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3.
                                       Mr.   S.B. Bhutada, counsel for respondent no.4.
                                       Mr.   Naval Shiralkar, counsel for respondent no.5.


                                               CORAM : SUNIL B.SHUKRE &
                                                       AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

DATE : 28.01.2021.

1. Learned counsel, who argued this matter before this Court earlier, now submits that she had argued each and every point, but some of them have not been considered by this Court including the submission relating to the different eligibility criteria applicable to CBSE students. The learned counsel who made submission before this Court and argued the matter, Ms. Sejal Lakhani, who was present, when the judgment was dictated in the open Court did not take any objection regarding non consideration of whatever points she has raised before this Court by making specific submissions and now today, she is making a statement that she had argued before this Court but, this Court did not consider anything.

2. Interestingly enough, the grievance that everything was argued but, not considered by this Court has not been incorporated by way of any averment or

Kavita

903-wp mca- (review) 19-21.odt

pleadings in the review application.

3. Nevertheless we would like to direct her to file an affidavit in this regard.

                              JUDGE                             JUDGE




Kavita