Bibishan Sarjerao Sanap v. The State Of Mah And ORS

WP No.7043/09 & Anr.

IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY

APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD 248 WRIT PETITION NO.7043 OF 2009 WITH WP/8015/2009 VITHAL UTTAM PAWAR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS ...

Advocate for respective Petitioner : Mr. S.S. Tope & Mr. A.D. Aghav AGP for Respondents State : Mr. S.K. Tambe ...

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & R.N. LADDHA, JJ.

DATED : 09/08/2021.

PER COURT :

.

We have heard Mr. S.S. Tope and Mr. A.D. Aghav, learned advocates for the respective petitioners. 2.

We are not considering the contentions on merits in view of the judgment of Full Bench of this Court in the case of Rajendra Pandurang Pagare & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. Reported in 2009 (4) Bom. C.R. 928. The District Maleria Officer, Jalna had filed affidavit. Paragraph 5 of the affidavit reads thus :- "05.

I say that eventhough the aforesaid position, this deponent is ready to send the proposal of the petitioner for consideration of his claim amongst

WP No.7043/09 & Anr.

the project Affected Candidate if this Hon'ble Court pass such order this behalf."

3.

It is not for the Court to direct, it is for the authorities to consider the proposal in accordance with law. The respondents may consider the proposal as stated in the affidavit and decision may be taken.

4.

The decision may be taken preferably within six months.

5.

With these observations, the writ petitions stand disposed of. Rule discharged. No costs.

[ R.N. LADDHA, J. ] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] ssc/