Abdul Baree Abdul Latif v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

wp2942-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2942 OF 2016 (Abdul Baree Abdul Latif Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others) ---- Mr. Girish Nagori, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. P.N. Kutti, A.G.P. for respondent No.1/State ---- CORAM :

S.S. SHINDE AND SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 20th JUNE, 2016 PER COURT :

1.

Heard.

2.

We are not inclined to entertain this petition in view of the fact that the petitioner will have liberty to reply to notice. All the contentions raised in this petition can be taken in the reply to the notice and during the enquiry. In that view of the matter, the writ petition stands rejected.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in respect of the recovery of the amount paid towards salary, etc. for the period for which the petitioner has already rendered services, notice is

wp2942-2016 issued by the respondents. In that regard, the petitioner would be at liberty to avail the appropriate remedy. With these observations, the writ petition stands rejected.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL] [S.S. SHINDE] JUDGE JUDGE npj/wp2942-2016