Madhav S/O Natthuji Dharne vs The Scheduled Tribe Caste ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 3389 Bom

                                                                                        wp6429.13.odt

                                                      1

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

                                 WRIT PETITION NO.6429/2013

     PETITIONER :        Madhav s/o Natthuji Dharne
                         Aged about 58 years, Occu. Retired, 
                         R/o Parijat Society, Wadgaon, Yavatmal.

                                                   ...VERSUS...


     RESPONDENTS :    1.  The Scheduled Tribe Caste Certificate 
                           Scrutiny Committee, Irvin Chowk, Amravati, 
                           through Secretary/Vice-Chairman. 

                                2.  The Deputy Director of Land Records, 
                                     Amravati Division, Amravati. 

                                3.  The Superintendent of Land Records, 
                                     Yavatmal.

     --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Mrs. P.D. Rane, Advocate for petitioner 
                       Shri K.L. Dharmadhikari, AGP for respondents 
     --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                    CORAM  :  SMT. VASANTI  A  NAIK AND
                                                                      ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.

DATE : 21.06.2017

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

By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order of

his reversion and has also sought a direction to the Scrutiny Committee to

decide his caste claim within a time-frame.

wp6429.13.odt

During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner has

expired. The learned Counsel for the petitioner states that though she had

contacted the legal representatives of the petitioner, till date the legal

representatives have not approached her for prosecuting the writ petition

by substituting their names in place of the deceased petitioner on record.

In view of the fact that the petitioner has expired and his

legal representatives are not brought on record till date, the petition

would abate. The writ petition is therefore disposed of with no order as to

costs. Rule stands discharged.

                  JUDGE                                                                JUDGE




     Wadkar