Sunil Purushottam Puranik v. The State Of Mah And ANR

1 wp 259.13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 259 OF 2013 Sunil Purushottam Puranik .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents Shri Ravindra V. Gore, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri B. V. Virdhe, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 1. Shri A. S. Bajaj, Advocate for the Respondent No. 2. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND K. L. WADANE, JJ.

DATE : 22ND AUGUST, 2016.

PER COURT :

.

Mr. Gore, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that, there are subsequent developments after filing of the present petition. The letter is issued by the Administrator of CIDCO to the original owners to submit the documents. The respondents be directed to decide the representation of the petitioner (Exhibit B and C).

2.

Mr. Bajaj, the learned counsel submits that, the CIDCO would consider the request of the petitioner on its own merits and in accordance with law and policy.

2 wp 259.13 3.

In the light of the above, we pass following order. 4.

The respondent No. 2/CIDCO shall consider application/representation of the petitioner (Exhibit B and C) on its own merits, in accordance with law and policy expeditiously. The writ petition accordingly is disposed of. No costs. [ K. L. WADANE, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/August 16