Munja Dattarao Panchal v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

154-wp.3568-18.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 154 WRIT PETITION NO.3568 OF 2018 MUNJA DATTARAO PANCHAL

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Mr. S.K.Chavan, Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr. K.B.Jadhavar, AGP for Respondents-State.

Mr. M.N.Navandar, Advocate for Respondent No.3. ...

CORAM :

S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE :

24th June, 2019 PER COURT :- 1.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has applied for appointment with respondents for P.A.P. Category. The petitioner belongs to the branch of Dattarao. The claim of the petitioner is rejected on the ground that two cousin brothers of the petitioner are appointed. However, they are appointed pursuant to the land of their father being acquired and not in respect of the petitioner's father.

2.

We have heard Mr. Navandar, the learned counsel for the respondent and submits that as two cousin brothers are already appointed, the case of the petitioner could not have

154-wp.3568-18.odt been considered.

3.

It appears that the lands of eight persons were acquired from the family of the petitioner. The persons appointed are from the Branch of Sakharam and Sheshrao. No appointment it seems have been made from the branch of Datta. The petitioner claims to belong to the said branch. The respondent shall once again verify the record and about the acquisition of the lands of the petitioner's father independently of the others that is from Sakharam and Sheshrao Branch and shall take decision afresh on its own merits. While taking the said decision the impugned order would not be impediment.

4.

The Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

5.

The petitioner may file additional documents with the respondents.

(MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) ...

vmk/-