Petitioners challenged non-decision on their appointment as Librarian. The court issued notice and directed the relevant respondent to decide the proposal on merits within four months before disposing of the writ petition.
Response sought from respondent No. 3 to decide the appointment proposal 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.
942
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
942 WRIT PETITION NO.1943 OF 2021
SWAPNIL RAJARAM PATIL AND ANOTHER
VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioners: Ms Pradnya S. Taleker i/by Talekar And Associates
AGP for respondents/State: Mr P. K. Lakhotiya
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ. DATE : 2nd February, 2021
ORDER :
to the appointment of petitioner No.1 as Librarian is not yet decided.
(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.)
JPC
Page 1 of 1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to direct the appropriate government authority to decide the proposal for the appointment of the petitioner as Librarian within four months.
Swapnil Rajaram Patil and Another
The State of Maharashtra and Others
S. V. Gangapurwala
Shrikant D. Kulkarni
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
