Shri Subhash Atmaramji Sarode vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 4232 Bom

2023:BHC-AS:12845-DB

             k                                     1/2                      14 wp 616.16 as.doc




                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                         WRIT PETITION NO.616 OF 2016

             Subhash Atmaramji Sarode
             since deceased through LRs
             Smt. Rekha Subhash Sarode & Ors.                                  ....Petitioners
                   V/S
             State of Maharashtra & Ors.                                       ....Respondents
                                                         ...

             Mr. N.V. Bandiwadekar, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Vinayak Kumbhar for
             the Petitioners.
             Mrs. R.A. Salunkhe, AGP for Respondent No.1-State.
             Mr. Shankar P. Thorat a/w Mr. G.B. Walawalkar for Respondent Nos.2 and
             3.
                                                 ...
                                          CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA, ACJ &
                                                   SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

DATE : 26 APRIL 2023.

P.C.:

1 We have heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioners and the

learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3.

2 It is not disputed by the learned Counsel for the Petitioners as well

as the learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 that the present

Petitioners are similarly situated as the Petitioners in Writ Petition

No.14575 of 2018 with other connected Writ Petitions decided under the

judgment and order dated 27th March 2023.

             katkam                                          1/2


 k                                   2/2                     14 wp 616.16 as.doc




3        In light of that and for the reasons recorded in the judgment and

order dated 27th March 2023 in Writ Petition No.14575 of 2018 with

connected Writ Petitions, the present Writ Petition is also disposed of on

the same terms which are reproduced as under:

"(i) The impugned order to the extent of recovery is quashed and set

aside.

(ii) The order with regard to re-pay fixation done is not interfered

with.

(iii) The amount, if recovered from the Petitioners, shall be refunded to

them within four months."

4. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. The Writ Petition is

disposed of.

5. No costs.

       (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)                   (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)




katkam                                    2/2