Disposed¶13

Ashok Devgaonda Patil v. the Union of India Thor. Ministry of Co-Operation

Bombay HC25 Apr 2025WP/5275/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ashok Devgonda Patil v. Union of India (Ministry of Co-operation), Writ Petition No.5275 of 2025, Bombay High Court, decided 25-04-2025 (Chandurkar & Sathaye, JJ.). Directions issued to respondent No.2 and respondent No.6 to decide complaints dated 16-12-2024 and 26-03-2025 on merits after hearing all parties within six weeks, in view of impending elections of respondent No.5; Election Programme of 03-04-2025 stayed in W.P. No.5418 of 2025 (Babasaheb Bhimrao Magdum); petition disposed of with merits points open and liberty reserved.

What did the court decide?

Directions to respondent No.2 and respondent No.6 to decide the respective complaints on their own merits after hearing all concerned parties within six weeks; all points on merits kept open; liberty reserved to the petitioners in case of any contingency. ¶13

Ashok Devgaonda Patil Vs the Union of India Thor. Ministry of Co-Operation — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶2

WRIT PETITION NO.5275 OF 2025 Ashok Devgonda Patil and Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. The Union of India, Through Ministry of Co-operation and Ors. .. Respondents

¶3

Mr. S.C. Naidu with Mr. Bhushan Jadhav, Advocates for the Petitioner. Mr. Ram Apte, Senior Advocate with Mr. N.R. Bubna, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1, 2, 3 and 6.

¶4

Mrs. Ashwini A. Purav, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent No.4.

¶5

Mr. Prasad S. Dani, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Drupad S. Patil and Mr. Dheeraj Patil, Advocates for Respondent No.5.

¶6

CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ DATE : 25^TH APRIL 2025.

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

At the outset, on instructions, it is submitted on behalf of the 5^th respondent that the Election Programme published on 3^rd April 2025 (page 341 of the writ petition) has been stayed in Writ Petition No.5418 of 2025 (Babasaheb Bhimrao Magdum and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.) by order dated 25^th April 2025. The statement is accepted.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioners in this context seeks a direction to be issued to the 2^nd respondent to decide the complaint dated 16^th December 2024. The said complaint is pending before the 2^nd respondent and the same requires consideration. He further prays for a similar direction to be issued to the 6^th respondent before whom complaint dated 26^th March 2025 has been filed.

¶10

1/2

¶11

909-WP-5275-2025.doc Dixit

¶12

Considering the fact that the complaints would require adjudication in view of the impending Elections of the 5^th respondent, it is directed that both the aforesaid complaints be considered on their own merits and decided after hearing all concerned parties within a period of six weeks of receiving copy of this order.

¶13

Keeping all points on merits open and with aforesaid directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶14

Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioners in case of any contingency.

¶15

[ M.M. SATHAYE, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ]

¶16

Digitally signed by SNEHA ABHAY 909-WP-5275-2025.doc DIXIT Date: Dixit 2025.04.25 16:50:26 +0530

¶17

2/2

¶18

SNEHA ABHAY DIXIT

Ashok Devgaonda Patil v. the Union of India Thor. Ministry of Co-Operation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Devgaonda Patil v. the Union of India Thor. Ministry of Co-Operation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Head Master Nizampur High School and Anr. Vs the Education Officer Secondary and Ors.

Shankar Vaman Madane and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra Throu. Its Sec. Dept of Co-Operation Marketing and Textiles and Ors.

Meenakshi Sahebrao Patil Vs the President, Raje Sambhaji Shikshan and Krida Prasarak Mandal and Ors.

Laxmi Tanaji Avghade Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Principal Secretary and Ors.

Ashok Gundiba Misal Vs the State of Maharashtra Throu. Principal Sec. Revenue and Forest Dept and Ors.

Nilesh Balu Avghade Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Principal Secretary Revenue and Forest Department and Ors.