Kondiba Mahajan Bhadre And ANR v. The State Of Mah And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6399 OF 2005 (Kondiba s/o Mahajan Bhadre and another Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others) ---- Mr. A.S. Kale, Advocate holding for Mr. S.B. Talekar, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. S.W. Munde, A.G.P. for the respondent/State ---- CORAM :

T.V. NALAWADE AND SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 8th JUNE, 2017 PER COURT :

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.G.P. Perused the record.

2.

It appears that the reliefs claimed in prayer clauses (A), (B) and (C) are not pressed by the petitioners. Today, it was submitted that indisputably the purpose of prayer clause (D) is served.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners seek relief only in regard to prayer clause (E) (page-19). In respect of this relief, the petitioners can make representation to the concerned Authority, if required and if already the amount is not paid. The Authority concerned shall take decision on such representation on its own merits. The petitioners

wp6399-2005 would be at liberty to approach this Court if any grievance still exists.

4.

The Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL] [T.V. NALAWADE] JUDGE JUDGE npj/wp6399-2005