SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

PRAKASH RAJARAM PATIL – Appellant
Versus
THE ADDL. COMMISSIONER, NASHIK DIVISION AND ORS – Respondent


Advocates:
['GORE RAVINDRA VITTHAL AND V P SHARMA', 'COPY SERVED ON G P', '', 'CAVEAT FILED BY S S THOMBRE']

1 wp 7940.12

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO. 7940 OF 2012

Prakash Rajaram Patil

.. Petitioner

Versus

The Additional Commissioner,

Nashik Division and others

.. Respondents

Shri R. V. Gore, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Shri N. B. Patil, A.G.P. for Respondents/State.

Shri S. S. Thombre, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4 to 6.

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.

DATE : 03RD DECEMBER, 2013.

PER COURT :

.

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that, the

respondent No. 5 is dead. In view of that, the challenge of the

judgment to the extent of respondent No. 5 does not survive.

2.

Heard the learned counsel. The present petitioner had

filed an application for disqualification of the present respondent

Nos. 4 to 6 on the ground of, (i) non payment of tax due and (ii)

the respondent No. 4 not holding monthly meetings.

2 wp 7940.12

3.

The Additional Collector allowed the application and

disqualified the respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6. The respondent Nos.

4, 5 and 6 preferred an appeal before the Commissioner. The

s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top