Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 3163 Bom
Judgement Date : 14 June, 2017
1406WP4372.13-Judgment 1/2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 4372 OF 2013
PETITIONER :- Shri. Shankar Haribhau Dhote, aged about
43 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Tukdoji Ward,
Near Mahuli Mandir, Behind Mohata
Garden, Hinganghat, Distt. Wardha.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS :- 1. State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary,
Mantralaya, Bombay-32.
2. Managing Director, Maharashtra State
Agricultural Marketing Board, Plot No.7,
Market Yard, Rool Tekdi, Pune.
3. Director of Agricultural Marketing Office of
the Director Agricultural Marketing
Maharashstra State, Pune.
4. Agriculture Produce Market Committee,
Samudrapur, through its Chairman,
Samudrapur, Distt. Wardha.
Deleted as per order 5. Shri Ulhas Vishram Dangat, Major C/o.
Dted. 25/10/2013 Anandrao Shankarrao Patil, Anand Vilas
Building Sambhaji Nagar, Tinhewadi Road,
Khed, (Pune).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.Anjan De, counsel for the petitioner.
Mr.H.R.Dhumale, Asstt.Govt. Pleader for the respondent Nos.1 and 3.
Mr. Ankush Kalmegh, counsel for the respondent No.2.
None for the respondent No.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK &
ARUN D. UPADHYE
, JJ.
DATED : 14.06.2017
1406WP4372.13-Judgment 2/2
O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt. Vasanti A Naik, J.)
By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the orders
of the Director of Marketing, Maharashtra State, Pune dated
07/02/2013 and 16/02/2013.
The petitioner was working as the secretary of Agricultural
Produce Market Committee, Samudrapur. During the pendency of the
writ petition, by an order dated 10/12/2013, this court had while
issuing certain directions to the respondents, also directed the Director
of Marketing to independently examine the proposal of the petitioner
and the other petitioners and take a necessary decision on the proposal
within a period of eight weeks. During the pendency of the writ
petition, the proposal of the petitioner was favourably decided by the
order of the Director of Marketing, dated 13/02/2014, inasmuch as
approval was granted to the appointment of the petitioner as secretary,
subject to certain conditions. It is stated by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that in view of the subsequent development that is based on
the order passed by this court on 10/12/2013, the grievance of the
petitioner would stand redressed.
Since the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed, the
writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs. Rule stands
discharged.
JUDGE JUDGE KHUNTE
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!