Anikta Shantaram Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

{1} wp2288.19.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2288 OF 2019 Kum. Ankita d/o Shantaram Patil Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & others Respondents Mr. P. B. Patil, advocate for petitioner.

Mrs. V.N. Patil Jadhav, AGP for respondents no. 1 to 5. Mr. A.B. Kadethankar, advocate for respondent no. 6. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ.

DATE : 11th March, 2019.

P.C. :

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2.

Without going into the merits of the petition, as learned counsel for the petitioner is restricting the submission to the extent of prayer seeking direction to the authority i.e. respondent no. 1, to decide the representation, the petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

3.

Representation is submitted to respondent no. 1 raising grievance about the reservation carved out. It is stated in the representation that this reservation is in contravention to the settled rules and provisions of the Act. The representation is submitted to the authority on 02.08.2018 and is pending for considerable long period. As such, the learned counsel prays for directions to respondent no. 1 to decide the representation

{2} wp2288.19.odt expeditiously.

4.

Respondent no. 1 is directed to decide the representation dated 02.08.2018, if not decided till date, as early as possible and not later than sixteen weeks from the date of service of this order, needless to state, on merits of the representation. 5.

With these directions, writ petition is disposed of. NITIN W. SAMBRE PRASANNA B. VARALE JUDGE JUDGE dyb