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 0, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Chaitali Sameer Thakre vs The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati ... on 28 February, 2020

Author: Manish Pitale

Bench: Manish Pitale

                                                                                      1                                                                   wp.6576.2019.odt



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

                                                  WRIT PETITION NO. 6576 OF 2019
                                                   Chaitali Sameer Thakre
                                                             ..Vs..
                               The Divisional Commissioner Amravati, Division Amravati & Others
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - -- - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,                                                                          Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders of directions
and Registrar's orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                                        Shri S.M. Vaishnav, Advocate for the Petitioner.
                                        Smt. Mrunal Naik, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1.
                                        Shri N.A. Gawande, Advocate for Respondent No.3.


                                                                  CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J.

DATED : 28th FEBRUARY, 2020.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties.

2. Arguable issues arise in the present writ petition, particularly because it is pointed out that the period of absence of the petitioner was allegedly between 14.03.2017 and 22.06.2017 and admittedly the petitioner who was pregnant at the relevant time delivered a child through a cesarean section on 17.03.2017.

3. Hence, Rule returnable early.

4. Smt. Mrunal Naik, learned A.G.P. waives notice for respondent No.1, Shri N.A. Gawande, learned counsel waives notice for respondent No.3.

5. The ad-interim relief granted by this Court shall continue to operate during the pendency of this writ petition.

JUDGE Vijay ::: Uploaded on - 02/03/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 12/06/2020 11:42:51 :::