Disposed

Tara Wd/O Gokul Marve and 3 Others v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mumbai and Anothers

Bombay HC18 Apr 2015WP/6412/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioners sought directions for immediate payment of retirement benefits due to Shri Gokul Marve. The respondent admitted the dues but cited financial crisis and promised payment within six months. The Court accepted this affidavit, disposing of the petition by accepting the statement without ordering immediate payment as costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of by accepting the respondent's undertaking to pay within six months; no order as to costs passed.

Tara Wd/O Gokul Marve and 3 Others Vs State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

1 18.04.wp.6412.14.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 6412/2014

¶4

( Tara wd/o Gokul Marve and others vs. State of Maharashtra and another )

¶5

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders

¶6

Mr. Alok Daga, Adv. for petitioners

¶7

Mr. Deepak Thakre, Asst. Government Pleader for Res.No.1 Mr.Milind Rathi, Adv. for Respondent no.2

¶8

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & A.M. BADAR, JJ.

¶9

DATED : 18^th April, 2015.

¶10

Heard .

¶11

By this petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondent no.2 to pay the retiral benefits payable to Shri Gokul Marve, immediately.

¶12

The respondent no.2 has filed an affidavit-inreply and it is stated therein that the retiral dues were payable to Gokul Marve, but the said amount was not paid due to acute financial crisis. It is stated that the said amount would be paid to the petitioners within a period of six months.

¶13

By accepting the statement made by the respondent no.2 in the affidavit-in-reply which would be

¶14

2 18.04.wp.6412.14.

¶15

binding on the respondent no.2, we dispose of the Writ Petition, with no order as to costs.

¶16

JUDGE

¶17

JUDGE

¶18

sahare

Tara Wd/O Gokul Marve and 3 Others v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mumbai and Anothers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tara Wd/O Gokul Marve and 3 Others v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mumbai and Anothers

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

Sau. Pallavi Surendrasing Solanke Vs Union of India, through Secretry, Ministry of Petrol and Natural Gas, New Delhi and 4 Others

Omprakash S/O. Khemraj Walde. Vs Smt.Bindu W/O. Omprakash Walde.

Sau. Lilesh W/O Vinod Agrawal Vs Vinod Ramrichpal Agrawal

Mrs. Lina W/O Sunil Konde Vs Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University, Nagpur through Its Registrar and 2 Others

Alka W/O Dindayal Uikey Vs Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, New Delhi through Its Secretary and 2 Others

Sou. Manda W/O Narayan Gavli Vs Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nagpur and 2 Others