Radheshyam Majoor Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Thr. Chairman, Prashant S. Kodarlikar And ORS. v. State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. Of Co-Operation, Marketing And Textiles, Mumbai And ORS

1 944.wp.2088.2025

IN THE HIGH

COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1173 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2088 OF 2025 Radheshyam Majoor Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit and ors. ..vs..

State of Maharashtra and ors.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Pushkar Ghare, Advocate for the applicants. Shri M.G. Bhangde, Senior Advocate a/b Shri N.L. Jaiswal, Advocate for respondent no.3.

Mrs. S.S. Jachak, Addl.P.P. for the State.

CORAM: ANIL S. KILOR AND PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ. DATED : 13/06/2025.

Heard.

2.

The petitioners have filed an application for amendment in view of the subsequent event i.e. opening of financial bids during the pendency of this petition. 3.

It is further stated that there is every possibility of issuing work order. Accordingly, the petitioners want to add certain prayer clauses. 4.

The non-applicants/respondents have no objection to allow the present application and further considering the reason and cause for amendment coupled with the fact that the matter is not yet admitted, we hereby allowed the application.

5.

Amendment be carried out within a week and amended copy be supplied to the respondents on or before the next date.

WRIT PETITION NO. 2088/2025 6.

Learned Counsel Shri Ghare appearing for the

2 944.wp.2088.2025 petitioner expressed apprehension that the concerned Authorities may issue the work order at any time. He accordingly prays for direction not to issue work order. 7.

After hearing both the parties, we are of the opinion that the purpose would be served if it is observed that the work order if any issued, shall be subject to the result of the petition.

8.

Thus, it is made clear that, work order if any issued, the same shall be subject to the result of the present petition.

9.

Place this matter for further consideration on 20.06.2025.

(PRAVIN S. PATIL , J.

) (ANIL S. KILOR , J.

) Trupti