Ramkrushna S/O Pandhari Honale v. Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, Express Towers, Mumbai Thr. Member Secretary And Others

1 wp3170.22.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 3170 OF 2022 ( Ramkrushna s/o Pandhari Honale ..vs.. Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, Mumbai and others ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. P.D. Meghe, Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. D.V. Mahajan, Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4, Mr. A.A. Madiwale, AGP for respondent No.5.

CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

DATE : 24-02-2025 Mr. D.V. Mahajan, learned Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4, upon instructions, submitted that the petitioner in the present petition is identically placed like the petitioner in Writ Petition No.3815/2012 with connected matters and the fact in issue in the petition is covered by the said decision. He also submitted that the petition can be disposed of in terms of the decision in the said petition.

2.

His statement is accepted.

3.

Having considered the statement of the learned Counsel for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and the facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the present petition in terms of what has been held in Writ Petition No.3815/2012 with connected matters decided on 29-08-2013. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of.

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) adgokar