Disposed

Dyaneshwar Suryabhan Kolhal v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC22 Feb 2019WP/2111/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two writ petitions challenging reversion of petitioners from Clerk to Peon were disposed of by allowing withdrawal with liberty to file appeals to the Divisional Commissioner along with condonation of delay applications.

What did the court decide?

Allowed amendment to add Divisional Commissioner as respondent; granted liberty to withdraw writ petitions with liberty to avail appeal to Divisional Commissioner.

Dyaneshwar Suryabhan Kolhal Vs the State of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

( 1 )

¶2

wp2109.19

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2109 OF 2019 GAJANAN MUNJAJI CHATTE

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

¶7

WITH WRIT PETITION NO.2111 OF 2019 DYANESHWAR SURYABHAN KOLHAL

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER

¶10

Mr.V.L.Dhoble, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr.A.R.Kale and Mr.S.S. Dande, AGPs for respondent/State.

¶11

CORAM : PRASANNA B.VARALE &
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
DATED :22.02.2019

¶12

P.C. :-

¶13

1.At the outset, learned Counsel Mr.Dhoble, orally
prayed to amend the petition by addition of the
Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division as party
respondent. The oral prayer is allowed. The amendment be
carried out forthwith.

¶14

2.Learned Counsel Mr.Dhobale fairly submitted that
though the petition was filed seeking challenge to the
impugned orders thereby the petitioners were reverted
from the post of Clerk to Peon as there is alternate and
efficacious remedy available to the petitioners, the

¶15

petitioners be allowed to withdraw the petition with
liberty to avail alternate remedy in the form of appeal
to the Divisional Commissioner. Learned Counsel also
submitted that the petitioners would also file
applications seeking condonation of delay.

¶16

3.If such appeals along with applications are
filed, respondent No.2 to consider applications and
appeals on its own merits.

¶17

4.With the above directions, the writ petitions
are disposed of.

¶18

[S.M.GAVHANE,J.] [PRASANNA B.VARALE,J.]

¶19

snk/2019/FEB19/wp2109.19

Dyaneshwar Suryabhan Kolhal v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dyaneshwar Suryabhan Kolhal v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Sanjay Pandurang Bhangade and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Smita Sharad Naik Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bharatibai Pandurang Sudewad Alias Bharatibai Deelip Bastewad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Popat Manikrao Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Al Zaid Jabbar Baghwan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Gajanan Munjaji Chatte Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another