Pujaritola Matsyapalan Sah. Sanstha Mary. Kotra, Thr. President Vinod Mangaruji Kagdimeshram v. The State Of Maha., Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Agriculture, Mumbai And Others
1 wp6964.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.6964 OF 2016 [Pujaritola Matsyapalan Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Kotra .vs. The 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 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mrs. Rajkumari Rai, Advocate for the petitioner, Smt. G.R. Tiwari, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3. ..........
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATED : DECEMBER 19, 2016.
Mrs. Rai, the learned counsel for the petitioner, states that though some other prayers are also made in the writ petition, the grievance of the petitioner would stand redressed, if the third prayer made by the petitioner is granted and a direction is issued against the State Government to decide the appeal of the petitioner filed in terms of Clause 25 of the Government Resolution, dated 26.6.2014, within a time frame. Since the prayer made by the petitioner is innocuous, we dispose of the writ petition, with a direction against the respondent no.1 to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner, after hearing the concerned parties, within ten weeks. Order accordingly. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE Gulande, PA