Sadashiv Vitthal Ghodke and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. The limited prayer in the petition is that the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of externment passed by Respondent No.3 is awaiting adjudication and the grievance of the petitioner would stand redressed, if the appellate authority is directed to decide the said appeal within a stipulated period.

¶12

2. We are, therefore, inclined to allow the petition with a direction that Respondent No.2 – Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune, shall decide the Appeal of the petitioner i.e., Externment Appeal No.49 of 2021 pending before him, as

¶13

Page 1 of 2

¶14

5_wp.3366.2021.doc

¶15

expeditiously as possible, if not decided already, and preferably within three weeks from the date of communication of this order, in accordance with law after observing the principles of natural justice.

¶16

3. We make it clear that we have not entered into the merits of the matter.

¶17

4. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed

¶18

of.

¶19

5. All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶20

(N.J. JAMADAR, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)

¶21

Page 2 of 2

Sadashiv Vitthal Ghodke and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadashiv Vitthal Ghodke and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Pradeep Bhaurao Bhangare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Suvarna Abasaheb Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

M/s Shreeji Jwelers Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bajarang Devidas Jadhav and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Lalit Govardhan Loya Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mitesh Suresh Parmar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.