Mohammad Sadique Mohammad Rafique v. State Of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Dept. Of Education And Sports, Mumbai And 2 Others

1 wp4016.14.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.4016 OF 2014 [Mohammad Sadique Mohammad Rafique .vs. State of Maharashtra 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. V.S. Bapat, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. A.D. Sonak, A.G.P. for the respondent nos.1 and 2, Mr. P.B. Patil, Advocate for the respondent no.3. ..........

CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ.

DATED : JANUARY 09, 2015.

P.C.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard finally by consent of the learned counsel for the parties. Considering the averments made and in the interest of justice, we are inclined to dispose of present writ petition by directing respondent no.2 to decide the representation dated 2.6.2014 filed by the petitioner (Annexure F), as early as possible, preferably within six weeks. However, considering the fact that this court had already passed the protection order in terms of prayer clause (b), the same is continued till the final decision by the concerned respondent so referred above and two weeks thereafter, if decision taken is adverse to the petitioner. The petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. (A.R. JOSHI, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.) Gulande