Madhukar Dattatray Petkar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 wp 9585.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 9585 OF 2015 Madhukar Dattatray Petkar .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Shri Pandit S. Anerao, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri S. K. Tambe, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. The Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 are served.

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND S. M. GAVHANE, JJ.

DATE : 10TH SEPTEMBER, 2018.

FINAL ORDER :

.

Though respondent Nos. 4 to 6 are served, none appears for respondent Nos. 4 to 6.

2.

The learned advocate for the petitioner states that, subsequently the respondent/institution has been allowed to run and conduct the institution for a period of one year protem, subject to inspection that will be done in future. The SLP filed by respondent Nos. 5 and 6 is allowed. Subsequently the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 have allowed the petitioner to join on 07th September, 2018.

2 wp 9585.15 3.

As it is contended by the petitioner that the respondents have allowed the petitioner to join with their institution, the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 shall submit the proposal seeking approval to the appointment of the petitioner to the respondent authority. Said proposal shall be sent within a period of six (06) weeks from today. Upon proposal being received by the respondent authority, the respondent authority shall take decision upon it within a period of six (06) weeks thereafter. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. [S. M. GAVHANE, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] bsb/Sept. 18 Digitally signed by Bhalchandra Sudhakar Bodke Date:

2018.09.11 10:51:30 +0530 Bhalchandra Sudhakar Bodke