Abhijeet Bhimrao Choudhari v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Co Operative Marketing And Another
2024:BHC-AUG:21405-DB *1* 26a43a44a46a49wp9785o24 Group
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 26 WRIT PETITION NO. 9785 OF 2024 SHIVANAND NARAYANRAO KANTHALE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CO OPERATIVE MARKETING AND TEXTILE DEPARTMENT AND ANOTHER ...
AND 43 WRIT PETITION NO. 9827 OF 2024 ABHIJEET BHIMRAO CHOUDHARI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CO OPERATIVE MARKETING AND ANOTHER ...
AND 44 WRIT PETITION NO. 9828 OF 2024 DNYANESHWAR TUKARAM RAUT
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CO OPERATIVE MARKETING AND TEXTILE DEPARTMENT AND ANOTHER ...
AND 46 WRIT PETITION NO. 9833 OF 2024 GANGADHAR MAHADEV LIKHE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CO OPERATIVE MARKETING AND TEXTILE DEPARTMENT AND ANOTHER ...
AND
*2* 26a43a44a46a49wp9785o24 Group 49 WRIT PETITION NO. 9842 OF 2024 PINTU RAMBHAU CHAVAN
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CO OPERATIVE MARKETING AND TEXTILE DEPARTMENT AND ANOTHER ...
Shri Pravin N. Kalani, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri S.R. Wakale, Shri S.K. Tambe, Shri M.M. Nerlikar and Shri N.S. Tekale, AGPs for Respondent No.1/State, in the concerned petitions.
Shri Vishal Bagal Patil, Advocate for Respondent No.2. ...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.
DATE :- 09th September, 2024 Per Court :- 1.
The learned AGPs point out that the State Government is completely unconnected with these matters. It is neither a necessary party, nor an answering Respondent. The dispute is between the Petitioner and Respondent No.2, which is the Dekhrekh Cooperative Society.
2.
The learned Advocate Shri Bagal submits, on instructions, that these Writ Petitions cannot be maintained in the Writ Jurisdiction of this Court. The learned Advocate for the
*3* 26a43a44a46a49wp9785o24 Group Petitioners is unable to convince us that the Respondent is a 'State' within Article 12 of the Constitution of India. 3.
In a group of cases filed earlier by other Petitioners [Writ Petition No.2701/2024 (Nandkishor Dagdoba Kale vs. The State of Maharashtra and another) and other connected petitions], the parties had settled their dispute outside the Court. Hence, we had permitted the Petitioners to withdraw the Petitions, vide our order dated 11.03.2024.
4.
In view of the above, these Writ Petitions are disposed off.
kps (Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)