Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Mr. Piyush Vishwas Jadhav vs Yashwant Ayurvedik Mahavidyalaya, ... on 23 January, 2019

Author: M.S.Karnik

Bench: S.C.Dharmadhikari, M.S.Karnik

                                                                                    7. wp 9879.14.doc

Urmila Ingale

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                        WRIT PETITION NO. 9879 OF 2014

                 Mr.Piyush Vishwas Jadhav                                      .. Petitioner
                      Vs.
                 Yashwant Ayurvedik Mahavidyalaya and ors.                      .. Respondents


                 None for the Petitioner.
                 None for the Respondents.


                                                 CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI &
                                                         M.S.KARNIK, JJ.

DATE : 23rd JANUARY, 2019 P.C. :

. The petitioner and advocate are absent. On 11/11/2014, this Court passed the following order :
" Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of Division Bench of this Court delivered in W.P.No.3391/2013 (Padmanabh Ratnakar Muley & others v. The State of Maharashtra and others). It is submitted that petitioner has filed application form for B.A.M.S. course and the same is accepted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for respondent No.2.

1/2 ::: Uploaded on - 25/01/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 25/01/2019 23:18:54 :::

7. wp 9879.14.doc

3. Issue notice, returnable after four weeks i.e. 9th December 2014. Respondent No.2 waives service.

4. There shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause

(d), subject to petitioner's fulfilling other eligibility conditions."

2. After this order has been passed, the petitioner and the advocate have not came forward nor has any affidavit been filed disclosing to this Court the event post this ad-interim order.

The Writ Petition was on board with the same appearance and was listed on 12 previous occasions. Today when it is called out, both the petitioner and the advocate are absent.

3. The Writ Petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Ad-interim order is vacated forthwith.

(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI) 2/2 ::: Uploaded on - 25/01/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 25/01/2019 23:18:54 :::