Petitioners sought directions from Respondent No.2 to decide a pending application for modification of the selection process within three months. The High Court disposed of the writ petition without costs.
Order to decide the pending application on merits preferably within three months if pending.
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
962 wp.2663.21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
962 WRIT PETITION NO.2663 OF 2021
EKNATH WALMIK MUNDE AND OTHERS VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Balasaheb S. Choure. AGP for Respondent/State: Mr. K. N. Lokhande. Advocate for Respondent No.2 : Mr. Anil S. Bajaj.
P.C.:
. Mr. Bajaj, learned counsel for Respondent No.2 is present. The petitioners seek directions against Respondent No.2 to decide the application dated 18th December, 2020 submitted by the petitioners for the purpose of modification of the selection process.
2 In case, the application filed by the petitioners (page Nos.32 to 35) is pending with Respondent No.2, then the Respondent No.2 shall decide the same on its own merits, in accordance with law and policy, preferably within three months.
nga
Eknath Walimik Munde and Others
The State of Maharashtra
Another
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
