Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2024 DAILYLAW 1645 (BOM)

SATISH S/O PANJABRAO DESHMUKH v. SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, WASHIM AND OTHERS

WP/6766/2024 · 2026-08-11

Civil Appealbody2024

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

(1) 902.WP6766.24 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 6766 OF 2024 Satish S/o Panjabrao Deshmukh VERSUS Sub-divisional Officer, Washim And Others --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.V. Band, Advocate for the Petitioner(s). Mr. C.A. Lokhande, AGP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : NANDESH S. DESHPANDE , J. DATE : AUGUST 11, 2026. 1. Heard Mr. A.V. Band, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who tenders across the Bar a copy of the pursis along with the order passed by the Tahsildar, Malegaon, on 13.03.2026. The pursis is taken on record along with the order dated 13.03.2026, which is marked as Exhibit “X” for identification. On the strength of the said order, he submits that the name of the petitioner, i.e. Satish S/o Panjabrao Deshmukh, has been removed from the proceedings and a penalty of Rs. 2,75,850/- has been imposed upon Respondent No. 4 herein. 2. As can be seen from the record of the matter, the inclusion of his name in the proceedings, which, according to him, was totally uncalled for, as he was not concerned with the subject matter, is challenged in the present petition. In view of the fact that the name of the petitioner has been removed, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending. 3. In view of the fact that the name of the petitioner has been removed, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending. 4. The petition is disposed of as infructuous. (NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) Shubham 2026:BHC-NAG:10355