Hemant Ashokrao Khedekar And ... vs The Divisional Commissioner, ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 803 Bom

                                                                                              wp400.16.odt

                                                          1




                                                                                              
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                              NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR




                                                                    
                                     WRIT PETITION NO.400/2016

         PETITIONERS:               1. Hemant Ashokrao Khedekar
                                        Aged 34 years, Occ : Social Worker.




                                                                   
                                    2.  Abhimanyu Dhondu Susar, 
                                         Aged 68 years, Occ : Retired. 

                                    3.  Jaibharat Shankar Apar, 




                                                   
                                         Aged 67 years, Occ. : Retired. 
                              ig    4.  Sau. Mandakini Madhukar Jadhav
                                         Aged 38 years, Occ. : Housewife. 

                                    5.  Santosh Bhagwan Bhagat, 
                            
                                         Aged 70 years, Occ. : Retired. 

                                        All r/o Jijamata Nagar, Shikshak Colony, 
                                        Buldana, Tq. and District : Buldana.
      


                                                       ...VERSUS...
   



         RESPONDENTS :   1.  The Divisional Commissioner, Amravati 
                               Division, Amravati. 

                                    2.  Collector, Buldana.





                                       3.  The Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Buldana.
                                         
                                       4.  Ravindra Janardhan Patil, 
                                            Aged : Major, Occ : Business, 
                                            r/o Vishnuwadi, Buldana.





         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Shri A.S. Kilor, Adv. with Ms Deepali Sapkal, Adv. for petitioners
                  Mrs. K.R. Deshpande, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2
                  Shri Abhay Sambre, Advocate for respondent no.3
                  Shri D.K. Raut, Advocate for respondent no.4
         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                         CORAM  :  SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, AND
                                                                           V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

                                                         DATE      :  21.03.2016 





                                                                                           wp400.16.odt






                                                                                          

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard

finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.

The only prayer made by the petitioners in the instant

petition is for a direction to the Divisional Commissioner, Amravati to

decide the revision application filed by the respondent no.4, within a

time-frame.

Since the prayer made by the petitioners is innocuous, we

allow the writ petition. The respondent no.1 - Additional Commissioner,

Amravati Division, Amravati or the authority holding the charge of the

Additional Commissioner is directed to decide the revision filed by the

respondent no.4 as early as possible and positively within a period of six

weeks.

The parties undertake to remain present before the

respondent no.1 on 30.03.2016 so that the issuance of notice to the

parties could be dispensed with.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order

as to costs.

                              JUDGE                                                      JUDGE
         Wadkar