← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/16695/2024disposed off

The State Of Maharashtra Through The Principal Secrtary Rural Development Department v. Archana Krishnadev Waghmale

2024-11-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil , Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.S. Chandurkar2 pages

SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION by SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT Date: 2024.11.14 10:07:12 +0530 WRIT PETITION NO.16695 OF 2024 The State of Maharashtra, Through Rural Development Department and Anr. .. Petitioners Vs.

Archana Krishnadev Waghmale .. Respondent Mr. N.K. Rajpurohit, Assistant Government Pleader for the Petitioner. Mr. Ashwin R. Kapadnis, Advocate for the Respondent. CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR & RAJESH S. PATIL, JJ DATE : 13TH NOVEMBER 2024.

P.C. :

1.

The challenge raised in this writ petition is to an interim order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dated 3rd October 2024 by which the effect and operation of the transfer order issued to the respondent on 25th September 2024 has been stayed. It is seen that after the ad-interim order was passed on 3rd October 2024, the proceedings were adjourned to 10th October 2024 and thereafter 23rd October 2024. On 23rd October 2024 while continuing the ad-interim relief, it was directed that the proceedings be kept on 12th November 2024, which was yesterday. It is informed that the Original Application is now fixed on 18th November 2024.

2.

Though the learned Assistant Government Pleader seeks to rely upon the affidavit-in-reply filed before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal to contend that grant of interim order was not justified, in the light of the fact that the interim order is operating since 3rd October 2024 and the Original Application is now fixed for final disposal on 18th November 2024, we are not inclined to exercise the discretion. Keeping all 1/2 905-WP-16695-2024.doc Dixit

points raised in the writ petition open for being urged before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, the writ petition is disposed of as not entertained. Ordered accordingly.

3.

The learned counsel for the respondent assures that no adjournment will be sought.

[ RAJESH S. PATIL, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ] 2/2 905-WP-16695-2024.doc Dixit