Petitioner sought direction to respondents to consider a proposal recommended by a third respondent. Court directed respondents to decide the proposal expeditiously within three months.
Direction to consider and decide the petitioner's proposal within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
W.P. No.1774/2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.1774 OF 2012
Yuvak Shikshan Prasarak Mandal ..PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Mah. & ors. ..RESPONDENTS
Mr C.V. Thombre, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr K.M. Suryawanshi, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 & 2
CORAM : B. R. GAVAI AND SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : 1st March, 2012
PER COURT :
The learned Counsel for the petitioner restricts his claim in the petition for a direction to respondents no.1 & 2 to consider and decide the proposal of the petitioner, which according to the petitioner, is recommended by respondent no.3.
2. Petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents no.1 & 2
to consider and decide the proposal submitted by the petitioner, which is recommended by respondent no.3 vide communication
2 W.P. No.1774/2012
dated 21.11.2009, as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within a period of three months from today.
(SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.)
(B. R. GAVAI, J.)
amj/wp1774.12
Yuvak Shikshan Prasarak Mandal
The State of Maharashtra
B. R. GAVAI
SUNIL P. DESHMUKH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
