Bombay High Court
Robin S/O Vasantrao Hole vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 22 November, 2021
Bench: S.B. Shukre, Anil Laxman Pansare
1/4 Judg.24.wp.3411.2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 3411 OF 2020
Robin s/o Vasantrao Hole
Aged about 27 Years, Occu - Unemployed
Resident at - Mohpa, Tahsil Kalmeshwar,
District Nagpur. ... PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra
through its Secretary, Rural Development
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. The State of Maharashtra
through its Secretary of General
Administration Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32.
3. Zilla Parishad, Nagpur
through its Chief Executive Officer, Civil
Lines, Nagpur.
4. Ankush Bhimrao Kedar
Aged - Adult, Occu - Divisional
Commissioner (estt.) Divisional
Commissioner Office, Civil Lines, Nagpur.
5. Anil Vitthalrao Kitey
Aged - Adult, Occu - Service;
Zilla Parishad Office, Civil Lines, Nagpur.
::: Uploaded on - 22/11/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 23/11/2021 05:40:43 :::
2/4 Judg.24.wp.3411.2020
[Respondent Nos.4 and 5 added vide
order dated 28/10/2021] ... RESPONDENTS
Mr. V. G. Wankhede, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. K. L. Dharmadhikari, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. S. N. Gaikwad, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
Mr. N. B. Kalwaghe, Advocate for Respondent No.5.
CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE &
ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ.
DATE : NOVEMBER 22, 2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.]
. Heard Mr. Wankhede, the learned Counsel for the
Petitioner, Mr. Dharmadhikari, the learned AGP for the Respondent
Nos.1 and 2, Mr. Gaikwad, the learned Counsel for the Respondent
No.3 and Mr. Kalwaghe, the learned Counsel for the Respondent No.5.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent of the learned Counsel for the respective parties.
3. Copy of the communication dated 18th November, 2021
addressed to the Petitioner is produced before us by Mr. Kalwaghe, the
3/4 Judg.24.wp.3411.2020
learned Counsel for the Respondent No.5. It is taken on record and
marked as document 'A' for identification.
4. The communication vide document 'A' shows that the order
dated 11/3/2020, whereby the name of the Petitioner was removed
from the waiting list of the aspirants seeking appointment on
compassionate ground has been withdrawn and now the name of the
Petitioner has been included in such waiting list. It also shows that this
has been done by protecting his seniority.
5. In view of above, we are of the view that main purpose of
the Petitioner has been served by the subsequent communication,
which is at document 'A', and therefore, this Petition is disposed of in
terms of the communication vide document 'A'.
6. The apology tendered by the Respondent Nos.4 and 5 on
17/11/2021 is accepted and the matter is closed.
7. Rule in above terms. No costs.
8. Since the Writ Petition is disposed of, pending Civil
4/4 Judg.24.wp.3411.2020
Application No. 1808/2021 does not survive. The same stands disposed
of accordingly.
(ANIL L. PANSARE J.) (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)
Yadav VG
