Disposed

Jayshree Jaideo Pendharkar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC27 Sept 2012WP/7708/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged transfer from her husband's service location. Court directed Chief Executive Officer of Zilla Parishad to decide the representation on merits within four weeks without granting stay.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar, to pass appropriate orders on the representation within four weeks. No stay granted.

Jayshree Jaideo Pendharkar Vs the State of Mah and Ors. — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

902.WRIT PETITION NO.7708 OF 2012

¶4

JAYSHREE JAIDEO PENDHARKAR
VERSUS

¶5

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS

¶6

...

¶7

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.H V Tungar, Adv. h/for
Mr.Deshpande C.R.

¶8

Mrs. AV Gondhalekar, AGP for Respondents Nos.1 & 3
Mr.PS Patil, Adv. For Respondent No.2:

¶9

¶10

CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL & A.B.CHAUDHARI,JJ. DATE : 27th September,2012.

¶11

PER COURT :

¶12

1)Heard the learned Counsel for the

¶13

petitioner.

¶14

2)The petitioner seeks accommodation on the
ground of couple convenience.

¶15

3)The learned Counsel for the petitioner
submits that the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla
Parishad, Nandurbar transfered the petitioner from
village Nandarkhe, Tq. Nandurbar to village Ambabari,
Tq. Akkalkuwa, District Nandurbar, which is far away
from the place of service of her husband, who serves
at village Nandarkhe, Tq. Nandurbar.

¶16

4)It is submitted that the petitioner has made
a representation to the authorities.

¶17

5)Without entering into merits of the matter,

¶18

¶19

in case the representation made by the petitioner is
received by the office of Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar, we direct the Chief
Executive officer, to pass appropriate orders thereon
in accordance with the merits and policy of the State
Government, if not already decided, within a period
of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

¶20

6)It is clarified that there is no stay
granted to the transfer of the petitioner.

¶21

7)With these directions, the petition is
disposed of.

¶22

(A.B.CHAUDHARI) (NARESH H.PATIL)
 JUDGE JUDGE

¶23

bdv/

Jayshree Jaideo Pendharkar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayshree Jaideo Pendharkar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Jagannath Pawar Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Prashant Vijay Male Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Banu Akil Jikare Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Mahadeo Sukhdeo Ghuge and Ors. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Sunil Bhika Patil Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Uttamrao Rambhaji Shelke and Anr. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.