Raakesh Rajendrakumar Agarwaal v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 14477 OF 2022 Raakesh R. Agrawaal

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra and Ors.

....Respondents --- Mr. Kishor Patil a/w Mr. Sameer Mhatre i/b Mr. Amol P. Mhatre, for Petitioner.

Mr.V.S. Gokhale,'B' Panel for Respondent-State. --- CORAM : R. D. DHANUKA & S. G. DIGE, JJ.

DATE : 24th NOVEMBER, 2022.

P.C. :

1.

Mr. Gokhale, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to delete Respondent Nos.2 & 3 from the cause title of the petition, in view of the petitioner only pressing for an order and direction against the Respondent No.1 to decide the revision application filed by the petitioner. Leave to amend is granted. Amendment to be carried out 1/3

forthwith. Re-verification is dispensed with. 2.

Rule.

Mr. Gokhale, learned counsel for the petitioner waives service for Respondent No.1-State. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

3.

By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks writ of mandamus against the respondent-revisional authority to decide the revision application and application for stay filed by the petitioner expeditiously. We are informed that the revision application is pending since 18th October 2022. 4.

The Respondent No.1 is directed to dispose of the said revision application along with stay application expeditiously and preferably within four months from the date of communication of this order by learned counsel for the petitioner to Respondent No.1 The petitioner is directed to communicate this order to the Respondent Nos.2 & 3 for information and compliance with a request to remain present at the time of hearing of revision application of the petitioner.

5.

The learned AGP to communicate this order to 2/3

Respondent No.1 for information.

6.

The writ petition is disposed of.

7.

Rule is made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.

8.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any views on the merits of the revision application. All contentions of both the parties are kept open. 9.

Parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

(S. G. DIGE, J.) ( R. D. DHANUKA J.) 3/3