Pratibha Rajdhar Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

wp3413.13 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3413 OF 2013 PRATIBHA RAJDHAR PATIL

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Nagargoje R.R.

AGP for Respondent No.1: Mr. S. S. Tope Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. R.S. Pawar .....

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

DATED : 23rd JULY, 2015 P.C. :- 1.

Mr. Nagargoje, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the request of the petitioner for transfer on the basis of couple convenience has not been considered. The petitioner has given representation/application in the year 2012 itself, however, no decision is being taken upon the same. Learned counsel submits that even representation has been given by the Zilla Parishad, Buldhana.

2.

Mr. Pawar, the learned counsel for the Zilla Parishad submits that in case no decision is taken on the representation, then the authority would take decision on its own merits.

wp3413.13 -23.

In the light of that, we pass the following order:-

O R D E R

I.

In case the applications of the petitioner (Exhibit G and H) are still pending with the authority, then the authority shall decide the same on its own merits in accordance with law and policy, expeditiously, preferably within four months.

II.

Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ( V. K. JADHAV, J.) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ) rlj/