Shri Sanjay Annaji Shende v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Rural Development Mantralaya Mumbai And Others
1/2 caw2612.16'
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
CIVIL APPLN. (W) NO. 2612 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3978 OF 2016 Sanjay Annaji Shende and others -vsState of Maharashtra and others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.
or directions and Registrar's orders.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. P.S.Kshirsagar, counsel for the petitioners/applicants. Mr. A.S.Fulzele, Addl.G.P.for the respondent No.1. Mr. J.B.Kasat, counsel for the respondent Nos.2 and 3. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK & MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 08.12.2016.
By this civil application, the applicants/petitioners seek a direction to the Zilla Parishad to consider the representations of the petitioner Nos.1 and 4 along with the representations of the petitioner Nos.5 and 6, as the case of the petitioner Nos.1 and 4 would also be governed by the husband wife unification policy. Shri Kasat, the learned counsel for the respondent-Zilla parishad, states that there is no harm in considering the representations of the petitioner Nos.1 and 4, but the petitioners should not insist that for implementing the husband wife unification policy, the spouse that is posted in the tribal area should be shifted to the non-tribal area where the other spouse is posted. It is stated that for implementation of the policy, the petitioners should agree that the spouse could be shifted to the tribal area in which the petitioners are posted.
Shri Kshirsagar, the learned counsel for the applicants/ petitioners, states that the applicants do not have any problem if the husband and wife are posted in the tribal area.
2/2 caw2612.16'
By accepting the aforesaid statements made on behalf of the parties, we direct the respondent-Zilla Parishad to consider the representations of the petitioner Nos.1 and 4 along with the representations of the petitioner Nos.5 and 6. The civil application stands disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE JUDGE KHUNTE