Disposed

Anand Kishanrao Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC28 Nov 2016WP/11710/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A batch of writ petitions challenging transfer orders and claims of state employees. The Court directed the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, to decide on the petitioners' representations on merit following transfer and claim policies within four months, without expressing an opinion on the merits itself.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, to decide on the petitioners' representations on merit within four months.

Anand Kishanrao Patil Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO. 11695 OF 2016

¶3

(Lalita Naranrao Bolam Versus The State Of Maharashtra
and Others)

¶4

WITH

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.11696 OF 2016

¶6

(Shashikala Nagnath Muke Vs. The State of Maharashtra

¶7

and others)

¶8

WITH

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO. 11697 OF 2016

¶10

(Santosh Sharanappa Mogalekar Vs. The State of

¶11

Maharashtra and others)

¶12

WITH

¶13

WRIT PETITION NO.11698 OF 2016

¶14

(Sanjay Narsingrao Siddewad Vs. The State of Maharashtra

¶15

and others)

¶16

WITH

¶17

WRIT PETITION NO.11699 OF 2016

¶18

(Ulhas s/o Namdeorao Karhad Vs. The State of Maharashtra

¶19

and others)

¶20

WITH

¶21

WRIT PETITION NO.11700 OF 2016

¶22

(Maruti Ramchandra Tokwade Vs. The State of Maharashtra

¶23

and others)

¶24

WITH

¶25

WRIT PETITION NO.11701 OF 2016

¶26

(Sow. Jemuna Dyanoba Malshetwar Vs. The State of
Maharashtra and others)

¶27

WITH

¶28

WRIT PETITION NO.11702 OF 2016

¶29

(Maruti Gangaram Niture Vs. The State of Maharashtra and

¶30

others)

¶31

WITH

¶32

WRIT PETITION NO.11703 OF 2016

¶33

(Sangram Babrao Dhage Vs. The State of Maharashtra and
others)

¶34

WITH

¶35

WRIT PETITION NO.11704 OF 2016

¶36

(Shivaji Ramchandra More Vs. The State of Maharashtra
and others)

¶37

WITH

¶38

WRIT PETITION NO.11705 OF 2016

¶39

(Shakuntla Ramchandra Doibale Vs. The State of
Maharashtra and others)

¶40

¶41

wp11695-2016+

¶42

WITH

¶43

WRIT PETITION NO.11706 OF 2016
(Lavanya Sambhaji Khandre Vs. The State of Maharashtra
and others)

¶44

WITH

¶45

WRIT PETITION NO.11707 OF 2016
(Sarubai Bhanudas Magar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and
others)

¶46

WITH

¶47

WRIT PETITION NO.11708 OF 2016
(Balaji Nagorao Gudle Vs. The State of Maharashtra and
others)
WITH

¶48

WRIT PETITION NO.11709 OF 2016
(Sunil Bhojram Rathod Vs. The State of Maharashtra and
others)
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.11710 OF 2016
(Ananda Kishanrao Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra and
others)

¶49

Mr.Santosh C. Bhosle, Advocate for the Petitioner/s
in all the writ petitions

¶50

Mr.M.M. Nerlikar, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2
in all the writ petitions

¶51

Mr.S.B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for respondent no. 3
in all writ petitions

¶52

CORAM :R.M. BORDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.

¶53

DATE : 28th November, 2016

¶54

PER COURT :

¶55

Heard.

¶56

2.These petitions can be disposed of by issuing

¶57

directions to the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad

¶58

Division, Aurangabad, to take decision on the

¶59

3 wp11695-2016+

¶60

representations tendered by the petitioners, on their

¶61

own merit and in accordance with the policy concerning

¶62

the transfer of the employees as well as on
consideration of the merit of the claim of the
respective petitioners, as expeditiously as possible,
preferably within a period of four months from today and
it is accordingly directed.

¶63

3.It is clarified that this Court has not

¶64

expressed any opinion on merit of the claim of the
petitioners and it would be open for the Divisional
Commissioner, Aurangabad to take suitable decision on
the representations of the petitioners, as directed
above.

¶65

4.All the Writ Petitions stand disposed of.

¶66

[ SANGITRAO S. PATIL ] [R.M. BORDE] JUDGE JUDGE

¶67

npj/wp11695-2016+

Anand Kishanrao Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Kishanrao Patil v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

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

Jijaram Shrikrushna Bagal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

The North Maharashtra University Jalgaon through Its Registrar Vs Uday Digambar Kulkarni and Othres

Janardhan Mhatarba Aher Vs the Stata of Maharashtra and Others

Balaji Ramrao Sutar and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Maruti Ramchandra Tokwade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ulhas Namdeorao Karhad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others