The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad directed subordinate officers to decide a pending mutation application within four weeks and warned against repeated writ petitions for administrative delays.
Directions issued to Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to decide the pending mutation application within four weeks.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 965 OF 2014
VINAYAKRAO PANDHARINATH GHOLAP VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioner : Shri S.S.Dixit h/f Shri A.N.Nagargoje GP for Respondents : Shri S.V.Kurundkar
CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI & RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, JJ. Dated: February 06, 2014
PER COURT :-
akl
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
2
WRIT PETITION NO. 965 OF 2014
He shall call for the report from all these officers and thereafter inform this Court, in turn, as to what steps he has taken. Let not such requests come again before this Court. Hereafter, such request made by the party / petitioner would result in visiting the District Collector and all officers subordinate to him with a direction to pay costs and personally.
( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ) ( S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. ) ...
akl
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition seeking directions for mutation entry should be heard when administrative remedies are available.
Vinayakrao Pandharinath Gholap
The State of Maharashtra
Respondent Nos. 3 and 4
S.C.Dharmadhikari
Ravindra V.Ghuge
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
