The petitioners sought direction for deciding a proposal. The respondent agreed to decide within two months and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
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.
1/1
2202wp250.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 250 OF 2016
(Smt. Lilabai Shiva Kirnake & another Vs. State of Maharashtra & others)
CORAM : B. R. GAVAI AND
P. N. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATED : 22 FEBRUARY, 2016
The immediate relief claimed by the petitioners is for direction to respondent No.4 to decide their proposal dated 23/4/2014.
Learned A.G.P. for the State, on instructions, states that the proposals of the petitioners would be decided within a period of two months from today.
On the submission made by learned A.G.P., respondent No.4 is directed to decide the proposal submitted by the petitioners within a period of two months from today.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE JUDGE
wwl
Smt. Lilabai Shiva Kirnake
another
State of Maharashtra
B. R. Gavai
P. N. Deshmukh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
