✦ Bombay High Court · 16 Apr 2012

SHRI PRADIP KAKODKAR & Anr. v. THE STATE OF GOA, THROUGH CHIEF

Writ Petition No. 698 of 2011U V BAKRE, A P LAVANDE

Case at a glance

Key paragraphs

  • Para 33. In view of the above, the cause of action in the present petition no more survives. The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. A. P. LAVANDE, J. U. V. BAKRE, J. ssm.

Judgment

Mr. Rohit Bras D'Sa, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. A. N. S. Nadkarni, Advocate General with Mr. A. Kakodkar, Addl. Govt. Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr. M. S. Sonak, Advocate for respondent No.3. Coram:- A. P. LAVANDE & U. V. BAKRE, JJ. Date:- 16th April, 2012 P.C.:- Heard Mr. D'Sa, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. A. N. S. Nadkarni, learned Advocate General appearing for respondents No.1 and 2 and Mr. Sonak, learned Counsel for respondent No.3.

2.

By this petition, the petitioners have sought the following reliefs : " a. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to restrain respondent no.3 from functioning as a Deputy Superintendent of police, or in any other capacity as an officer of the Goa Police, or in exercise of any powers conferred upon officers of the Goa Police by law; b. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call for the entire service record of Respondent No.2 to be deposited with this Hon'ble Court; ".

2. Mr. Sonak appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 submits that respondent No.3 has already submitted an application, seeking voluntary retirement, to respondent No.1 about 10 days ago and the said application has been submitted without prejudice to his rights and contentions in the criminal proceedings initiated against him. Mr. Nadkarni, learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 and 2 submits that respondent No.1 would consider the request of respondent No.3 for voluntary retirement and superannuate him.

3.

In view of the above, the cause of action in the present petition no more survives. The writ petition, accordingly, stands disposed of. A. P. LAVANDE, J. U. V. BAKRE, J. ssm.

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. 698 of 2011). ← Search more judgments