IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY…
Writ petition disposed without considering merits; Respondent No. 1 directed to consider representation filed by petitioner.
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 wp 9857.2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
23 WRIT PETITION NO.9857 OF 2021
ANANTRAO DAGDU GARDE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Petitioner:
Mr. Ameya Sabnis h/f. Mr. Datta N Mudiganti
AGP for Respondents No.1 & 2:
Mrs. V. N. Patil-Jadhav
...
CORAM:S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
R. N. LADDHA, JJ.
DATE:06th SEPTEMBER, 2021
PER COURT:
1.We have heard Mr. Sabnis, learned Advocate
for the petitioner.
2.The learned Advocate submits that the
petitioner has given an application with the
Principal Secretary of the Public Works Department
bringing to his notice the malfeasance and
misfeasance on the part of the officials of the
Public Works Department in handing over the work
to the firm of the husband. The illegalities and
irregularities have brought to the notice of the
Principal Secretary on 26.02.2020 and 11.03.2020
but no further steps have been taken.
2 wp 9857.2021
3. The learned A.G.P. appears for respondents
no. 1 and 2.
4.At present we are not considering the relief
claimed by the petitioner on merits. If the
petitioner feels that illegality and
irregularities of large magnitude has taken place
and he has also approached the Principal Secretary
Public Works Department, the petitioner may
prosecute the said representation with the
Principal Secretary Public Works Department. The
respondent no. 1 shall consider the representation
filed by the petitioner in accordance with law and
rules and may take further steps as he may deem
fit preferably within a period of six (06) months.
5.Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. It
is made clear that we have not considered the
contentions on merits of the parties. No costs.
[R. N. LADDHA, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]
marathe
Anantrao Dagdu Garde
State of Maharashtra
Other
S. V. Gangapurwala
R. N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court