✦ Bombay High Court

Kisan Bank Karmachari Sanghatna v. Bank Karmachari Sangh, Latur

Writ Petition No. 8157 of 2010R M BORDE, B R GAVAI

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

Petition stands disposed of

Judgment

Operative part

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8157 OF 2010 Kisan Bank Karmachari Sanghatna .. PETITIONER VERSUS Bank Karmachari Sangh, Latur & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. S.S. Deshmukh, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.S.H. Dharap , advocate with Mr. K.A.Kadam, advocate for respondent no. 1. Mr. V.D. Hon, advocate respondent no. 2. ===== CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE : 20th DECEMBER, 2010 PER COURT : 1 Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioner states on instructions that he does not want of press the reliefs as prayed for by him in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ and ‘D’ of the petition. The petition is restricted only to the extent of issuance of directions to Assistant Registrar under Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 to dispose of the application tendered by the petitioner on 1-6-2010, expeditiously. 2 wp8157.10 2 Petition is therefore disposed of with directions to the Assistant Registrar, under Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946 to decide the pending application tendered by the petitioner on 1-6-2010 in accordance with provisions of law and after extending an opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, within a period of three months from today. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. Petition stands disposed of. ( R. M. BORDE ) JUDGE ( B. R. GAVAI ) JUDGE

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Petition stands disposed of

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 8157 of 2010). ← Search more judgments