Suhas Chintaman Mulay v. The Union Of India And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.48 OF 2018 Suhas s/o. Chintaman Mulay .. PETEITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The Union of India, Through Ministry of Urban Development, New Delhi.

2.

The State of Maharashtra Through its Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

3.

The Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar Through its Commissioner, Ahmednagar.

4.

The Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Ahmednagar.

5.

The Superintendent of Police, Ahmednagar, Dist. Ahmednagar. ..RESPONDENTS ...

Mr.Sandip R. Andhale, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.A.B.Girase, PP for the respondent/State Mr.D.G.Nagode, ASG for respondent no.1.

Mr.S.V.Dixit, Advoate for respondent no.4.

...

CORAM: S.S. SHINDE AND V.K.JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : 23.07.2018

ORDER:

1] Pursuant to the notices issued to the respondents, respondent No.3 - Corporation has filed reply.

2] Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in case the State Government is directed to decide the representation filed by the petitioner, praying therein to appoint an Administrator to look after the affairs of respondent No.3 - Corporation, the petitioner is satisfied.

3] In the light of above, we direct respondent no.2 to decide the representation filed by the petitioner, if already not decided, on its own merits, keeping in view the relevant procedure and Rules, as expeditiously as possible, however, within three months from today. The Petition stands disposed of.

4] However, we make it clear that we have not entered upon the merits of the contentions

raised in the Petition or in the reply filed by respondent No.3, and it is for respondent no.2 to take appropriate decision, in accordance with law, on the representation of the petitioner.

5] The parties to act upon authenticated copy of this order.

[V.K.JADHAV] [S.S.SHINDE] JUDGE JUDGE DDC