Bombay High CourtWP/13667/2018disposed offdismissed for default

Shivbhushan Laxmanrao Jadhav v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2018-12-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prasanna B. Varale,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Mangesh S. Patil2 pages

1 911

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.13667 OF 2018 SHIVBHUSHAN LAXMANRAO JADHAV

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Jadhav N.L.

AGP for Respondents: Mr.S.M.Ganachari ...

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & MANGESH S. PATIL,JJ.

DATE : 13/12/2018 PER COURT :- At the outset, Mr.Jadhav, learned counsel for the petitioner orally prayed for amendment to the petition. Oral prayer is allowed. Amendment be carried out forthwith. 2] The submission is that the petitioner though approached the respondent no.3 i.e. State Information Commissioner, Bench at Aurangabad on 9/10/2018 till date of filing of petition, no cognizance was taken by the Commission.

3] On perusal of the material placed on record, the learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the orders passed by respondent no.3- State Information Commission in as many as nine appeals. It is submitted by the petitioner that the petitioner sought certain information of public importance and

2 911 though the appeals are admitted by assigning the reasons and accepting the submissions of the petitioner there was no compliance of the order passed in the appeal, as such, the petitioner was left with no choice but to approach respondent no.3 again by various representations seeking implementation of order by taking recourse to Section 20 of the Act. 4] A detail representation is submitted to the respondent no.3 which runs in more than ten pages. Considering the very limited grievance of the petitioner that the representation filed on 9/10/2018 is pending before the respondent no.3 for considerable long period, we are of the opinion that the petition itself can be disposed of by issuing directions to the respondent no.3- the State Information Commissioner, Bench at Aurangabad to decide the representation dated 9/10/2018 submitted by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and not lateron twelve weeks from the date of order of this Court.

5] Needless to state that the respondent no.3 to take the decision on the merits of the representation/application submitted by the petitioner and by following the provisions of law more particularly the provisions of the Right to Information Act 2005.

6] With these directions, Petition is disposed of. (MANGESH S. PATIL,J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE,J.) umg/