SAQUIB ABDUL HAMID NACHAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by the original petitioner seeking review of an order made by this Bench deciding certain questions of law referred for an-swer to the Full Bench by a Division Bench of this Court.

(2.) When the matter was taken up for hearing by the Full Bench, the ques-tion referred to the Full Bench was refrained so as to encompass the entire scope of the provisions of law. Arguments were heard on the basis of those newly framed questions and all the petitions were disposed of by the order of the Full Bench.

(3.) The submission is that the Division Bench referred only one question which even after refraining remained applies to those submissions of law. Other writ petitions involving some other questions had also stand decided by the judgment of the Full Bench which in effect is deciding those questions without affording any opportunity of hearing of those points to the petitioner. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner before the Full bench were well aware of this situation and nothing beyond the submissions made was canvassed. These questions could have been canvassed before the full Bench. No arguments were advanced for the reasons that none survives after the deceased.