The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation regarding unpaid salary within four months and decided the petition without adjudicating the merits of the claim.
Directed respondents to consider representation on unpaid salary and take appropriate decision within four months.
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.
hvn
936
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 3020 OF 2017
Shyam Bhujangrao Naik ...Petitioner vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Dhakne Vijaya for the Petitioner.
Mrs. V.N. Patil-Jadhav, AGP for the Respondent nos. 1 to 3 State.
CORAM : SHANTANU KEMKAR & N.W. SAMBRE, JJ. AUGUST 10, 2017
P.C.:
Parties through their counsel.
hvn
936
and take appropriate decision in regard to the petitioner's claim for unpaid salary. In case the petitioners are found to be entitled for the same, the same be paid to the petitioners. Let the entire exercise be completed within the period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
(N.W. SAMBRE, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether theBombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) should direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation for unpaid salary.
Whether the Court can dispose of the writ petition by directing appropriate consideration of the claim without adjudicating merit.
Shyam Bhujangrao Naik
State of Maharashtra
Shantanu Kemkar
N.W. Sambre
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
