Suresh Ramchandra Wagh v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 955 WRIT PETITION NO.14188 OF 2021 DINKAR SHRIPAT CHOPADE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Bhamre Manish V. AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3-State : Mrs. V.N.Patil (Jadhav) Advocate for Respondent Nos. 5 and 7 : Mr.Dayama Nirmal R. AND 956 WRIT PETITION NO.14195 OF 2021 SANTOSH RUPA BIRPAN
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Bhamre Manish V. AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3-State : Mr. S.B.Yawalkar Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4, 5 & 7 : Mr.Dayama Nirmal R. AND 957 WRIT PETITION NO.14202 OF 2021 SURESH RAMCHANDRA WAGH
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr.Bhamre Manish V. AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3-State : Miss.R.P.Gaur Advocate for Respondent No. 4,5 & 7 : Mr.Dayama Nirmal R. AND 958 WRIT PETITION NO.14225 OF 2021 RAJENDRA PANDURANG PATIL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr.Bhamre Manish V. AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3-State : Mr.K.N.Lokhande Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4,5 and 7 : Mr.Dayama Nirmal R. ...
AND 959 WRIT PETITION NO.14256 OF 2021 RAMESH GANPAT UMBARKAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Bhamre Manish V AGP for Respondent nOs. 1 to 3-State : Mr.A.S.Shinde Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4,5 and 7 : Mr.Dayama Nirmal R. AND 960 WRIT PETITION NO.14259 OF 2021 TULSIDAS CHINDHU BOROLE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Bhamre Manish V. AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3-State : Mrs. V.N.Patil (Jadhav) Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4,5 and 7 : Mr.Dayama Nirmal R. AND 961 WRIT PETITION NO.14264 OF 2021 DINESH DIGAMBAR MORE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS ...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Bhamre Manish V. AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3-State : Mr. S.B.Yawalkar
Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 7 : Mr.Nirmal R. Dayma CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & SANDEEP V. MARNE, JJ.
DATE : 15.09.2022 PER COURT :
1.
The learned Advocate representing for respondent Municipal Corporation has filed reply in all the Writ Petitions. 2.
The petitioners are aggrieved by the fact that they have not been allowed to withdraw the Provident Fund in terms of statement made in paragraph No. 2 of the affidavits in reply filed in all these petitions.
3.
We therefore, dispose off the Writ Petitions accepting aforementioned statement made in the affidavits-in-reply as an undertaking to this Court.
4.
Respondent Municipal Corporation shall now take a decision within four weeks.
( SANDEEP V. MARNE ) ( MANGESH S. PATIL ) JUDGE JUDGE mahajansb/