Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 2483 Bom
Judgement Date : 25 January, 2024
1 904-WP-8832-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 8832 OF 2023
RANI SHAHAJI SHINDE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Shrikant G. Kawade
AGP for Respondents No.1 and 2 : Mrs. M. L. Sangit
Advocate for Respondents No.3 to 5 : Mr. Bhausaheb B. Bhise
Advocate for Respondent No.6 : Mr. D. K. Chavan
Advocate for Respondent No.7 : Mr. J. J. Patil h/f. Mr. S. R. Zambare
...
CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.
DATE : 25-01-2024 PER COURT :-
1. Respondent No.6 has filed affidavit-in-reply and documents on the facts and supplying the information to the complainant. However, he find that he was not party before the subordinate authorities. Then, the question is how he could be the party to the present petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had supplied the information of C.E.O. Hence, he was a necessary party. Respondent No.6 was the Village Development Officer (Gramsevak) and a public servant. He has to obey the orders of Superior. Therefore, mere supplying the information to the Superior Officer would not make him a necessary party. Unfortunately, he argued with full force, but his arguments were futile as he was never the party to any proceedings. Hence, respondent No.6 is deleted from the petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner to make necessary amendment, forthwith.
4. Reserved the petition for judgment.
( S. G. MEHARE, J. ) rrd
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!