Mohd Sajid Ali Mohd Munawarr Ali v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.147 OF 2019 Mohd. Sajid Ali s/o Mohd. Munwarr Ali, Age: 77 years, Occ: Nil, R/o. Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded.

..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary Urban Development Department Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

1A.

The Hon'ble Minister for Urban Development Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

2.

The Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad.

3.

The Collector, Nanded, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded.

4.

The Dy. Collector, Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded.

5.

The Sub Divisional Officer, Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded.

6.

The Municipal Council, Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded Through its Chief Executive Officer.

..RESPONDENTS

(2) Mr G.R. Syed, Advocate for petitioner;

Mrs M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondents CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND S.M.GAVHANE, JJ.

DATE : 8th JANUARY, 2019 ORAL ORDER :

At the outset, Mr. Syed, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner prays for amendment to the petition. He submits that inadvertently, Hon'ble Minister for Urban Development Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai to whom representation is submitted by the petitioner is not made party to the petition and only, the Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai is made party as respondent No.1 to the petition. He orally prays for adding Hon'ble Minister for Urban Development Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai as party respondent to the petition, as the representation is submitted to the Hon'ble Minister for Urban Development Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai and copy of the representation

(3) is also placed on record.

2.

Oral prayer is allowed. Necessary amendment be carried out forthwith.

3.

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner.

4.

As very limited prayer is made to this Court by way of present petition, in our opinion, the petition itself can be disposed of at admission stage, considering the very limited prayer.

5.

Our attention is invited to certain documents placed on record. On 10th July, 2012 the petitioner submitted representation to the office of the Collector, Nanded. A reference is made to certain orders passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.8758 of 2011. It is also stated in the representation that probably documents or the material was subjected to an unfortunate incident of fire took place in Mantralaya building. The

(4) petitioner submitted second copy of his grievance/representation.

6.

Then the petitioner submitted application to the Hon'ble Minister for Urban Development Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai. It may not be necessary for us to refer the contentions of the representation. Suffice to say that by communication dated 4th October, 2016 the Desk Officer informed the District Collector, Nanded to keep competent officer present before the Hon'ble Minister along with record and report on hearing scheduled before the Hon'ble Minister on 5th October, 2016.

7.

Perusal of the next representation dated 3rd April, 2018, copy of which is placed on record show that as there was no response, the Desk Officer issued reminder on 14th March, 2018 and the petitioner requested the Hon'ble Minister to take decision as early as possible.

(5) 8.

Now, this being the fact-situation, we dispose of the petition by directing the added respondent No.1-A i.e. Hon'ble Minister for Urban Development Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai to decide the representation as early as possible and not later than twelve (12) weeks from the date of the order of this Court, if it is already not decided.

9.

With this direction, the petition is disposed of.

( S.M.GAVHANE ) (PRASANNA B. VARALE) JUDGE JUDGE Tupe