All Writ Petition (Civil)

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 14251 OF 2017 Smt. Majedabano Mohd. Mukeem Ansari ....Petitioner V/S Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation, Through Its Commissioner And Ors. ....Respondent CORAM : A.S. OKA & SMT. VIBHA VASANT KANKANWADI, JJ DATE : 14th June, 2017 P.C. : On account of paucity of time, matter stands adjourned to 12/12/2017. If any ad-interim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will be continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim or interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: pmw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6665 OF 2017 Smt. Majedabano Mohd. Mukeem Ansari … Petitioner Vs. Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation and Ors. ... Respondents Mr. Atharva A. Dandekar for the Petitioner. CORAM : A.S. OKA & SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ. DATE : 20th JUNE, 2017 P.C. . Not on Board. Taken on Board. 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. He states that notice of today's application has been served to the first respondent. He states that he will file an affidavit of service. We accept the statement. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 19th July, 2017. We direct the first respondent to depute the Designated Officer of the concerned ward to the site for ascertaining whether illegal construction as alleged by the petitioner is in progress. The Designated Officer shall visit the site within a period of three working days from the date on which an authenticated copy of this order is served to the first respondent. 2 If the Designated Officer finds that illegal construction is in progress, he shall forthwith take steps in accordance with law for stopping the illegal construction and thereafter proceed to take steps for demolition of the illegal construction in accordance with law. 3 Compliance affidavit shall be filed by the Designated Officer before the next date. The first respondent to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. 4 In addition to service through Court, private service is permitted. Along with private notice authenticated copy of this order shall be forwarded to the concerned respondents. (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J) (A.S. OKA, J)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6665 OF 2017 Smt. Majedabano Mohd. Mukeem Ansari ....Petitioner V/S Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation, Through Its Commissioner And Ors. ....Respondent CORAM : A.S. OKA & SMT. VIBHA VASANT KANKANWADI, JJ DATE : 19th July, 2017 P.C. : On account of paucity of time, matter stands adjourned to 29/09/2017. If any ad-interim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will be continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim or interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6665 OF 2017 Smt. Majedabano Mohd. Mukeem Ansari ....Petitioner V/S Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation, Through Its Commissioner And Ors. ....Respondent CORAM : A.S. OKA & P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ DATE : 11th January, 2018 P.C. : On account of paucity of time, matter stands adjourned to 02/04/2018. If any ad-interim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will be continue to operate till the next date. If ad-interim or interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said order will remain unaffected. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6665 OF 2017 Smt. Majedabano Mohd. Mukeem Ansari ....Petitioner V/S Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation, Through Its Commissioner And Ors. ....Respondent Mr Atharva A.dandekar For Petitioner Mr N. R Bubna for R.no.1 CORAM : A.S. OKA & P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ DATE : 12th January, 2018 P.C. : Not on Board. Taken on Board. No Order. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6665 OF 2017 Smt Majedabano Mohd. Mukeem Ansari ..Petitioner vs. Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation, through its Commissioner and Ors. ...Respondents Mr.Atharva A. Dandekar for the Petitioner. CORAM : A.S. OKA & P. N. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : 22nd JANUARY, 2018 P.C.: . Not on board. Taken on board. Mr. Dandekar, the learned counsel appearing for Petitioner states that he has served a notice to the advocates representing the Respondent No.1 as well as the Respondent No.4 of today's application. We accept the statement. Affidavit of service be filed within one week from today. He states that the Designated Officer of the Respondent No.1 has not complied with the directions contained in the order dated 28th June 2017. Place the Petition under caption "Direction" on 9th February 2018. We direct the Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation to ensure that the Designated Officer of the concerned ward personally remains present on the next date along with the file. Advocate for the Petitioner to serve a copy of this order in the office of the Commissioner of the Respondent No.1 and the Commissioner shall act upon the said order. (P.N. DESHMUKH, J) (A.S. OKA, J.)

Order - Status 19: pmw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6665 OF 2017 Smt. Majedabano Moh. Mukeem Ansari … Petitioner Vs. Bhiwandi Nizampur City Municipal Corporation & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Atharva Dandekar for the Petitioner. Mr. N.R. Bubna for the Respondent No.1. Mr. Atul G. Damle, Senior Advocate i/by Mr. R.D. Suryawanshi for Respondent Nos.2 to 4. CORAM : A.S. OKA & P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : 9 th FEBRUARY, 2018 P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for the second to fourth respondents. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent has produced for perusal of the Court a file containing relevant documents. The file shows that on 15th October, 2015 when the officers of the Municipal Corporation inspected the structure subject matter of this Petition (pages 79 to 83), construction of ground floor was in progress. It appears that further inspection was carried out on 16th October, 2015, when certain construction material was seized. It appears that on 4th November, 2015 a notice was issued to second and third respondents calling upon them to stop the construction. On 7th November, 2015 when the Municipal Officers visited the property, it was found that slab of the ground floor was laid which was not in existence on 15th October, 2015. On 8th March, 2016, when the Municipal Officers visited the property it was found that brick work of the ground floor and the construction of erection of columns of the first floor was in progress. Photographs taken on that date are also part of the file. It appears that prosecution was lodged against second and third respondents under Section 52 of the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 (for short "the MRTP Act, 1966"). There are further reports of inspection carried out by the Municipal officers and photographs taken during the course of inspection. It appears that construction continued on the site. The report dated 11th August, 2016 submitted by the Municipal officers of the inspection along with photographs show that RCC work of ground plus two floors was completed and work of third floor was in progress. 2 On 31st May, 2017 again inspection was taken when it was found that substantial work of ground plus three floors was completed. Some shops on the ground floor were occupied and the construction of fourth floor was in progress. There are subsequent notices issued by the Bhiwandi Nizampur Municipal Corporation and in fact of 2nd June, 2017 hearing was fixed. It appears that FIR was registered vide C.R. 81/2017. On 7th June, 2017 an order was made by the Assistant Commissioner which is addressed to second and third respondents which holds that construction of ground plus four floors made by them is completely illegal. In terms of adinterim order passed by this Court on 12th July, 2017 the Municipal Officers visited the building. At that time, it was found that construction of ground plus five floors was completed. The work of plastering upto three floors was completed. Partial brick work of fourth floor was completed and brick work of fifth floor was in progress. It is pointed out that out of 13 galas on the ground floor, some have been occupied and some are kept closed. It is pointed out that some of the flats have been also occupied. The photographs taken on 24th October, 2017 have been annexed which show that substantial number of shops on the ground floor have been occupied and parts of the upper floors has been occupied. 3 It is true that the petitioner has filed a suit for injunction against second to fourth respondents in which a limited injunction has been granted which prevents the second to fourth respondents from carrying out construction. The documents in the file prima facie show that there is no development permission granted to second to fourth respondents. The second to fourth respondents have proceeded with construction as stated above after 27th July, 2015. Apart from the fact that construction is grossly illegal it was completely in breach of the order dated 27th July, 2015 passed by the Civil Court. 4 The issue in this Petition is about inaction of the Bhiwandi Nizampur Municipal Corporation to take action of demolition against the illegal structure. Notwithstanding the pendency of the suit filed by the petitioner, this Petition will have to be interfered as the documents produced by the Municipal Corporation prima facie show that notwithstanding several notices issued by the Municipal Corporation and notwithstanding grant of interim relief by the trial Court, the construction high handedly proceeded. The construction of ground plus five floors is completely illegal. Some of the premises have been permitted to be occupied. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second to fourth respondents states that Shri Ethesham Ahmed Azmi is present in the Court on behalf of the second to fourth respondents. 5 At this stage, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second to fourth respondents pointed out that in this Petition the grievance made is about illegal construction in respect of CTS No.334, Survey No.32, Hissa No.3 (part). The documents in the file to which we have made a reference indicate that the same are in respect of the land bearing Survey No.72/3, CTS No.342, Vetalpada, Bhiwandi. Thus, the structure subject matter of the documents in the file is on land bearing CTS No.342, Survey No.72/3 in respect of which no relief is claimed in the Petition. 6 We may note that in R.C.S. No.428 of 2015, the prayer sought is in respect of the land bearing CTS No.334, Survey No.32, Hissa No.3 (part) at village Nagaon, Khandupada. Therefore, second to fourth respondents were right in submitting that the file which is produced by the learned counsel appearing for the Municipal Corporation does not relate to City Survey No.334, Survey No.32, Hissa No.3 or Survey No.82, Hissa No.3. 7 In the circumstances and in view of the fact that the suit filed by the petitioner is already pending in the Civil Court, we decline to entertain this Petition. However, we clarify that notwithstanding the disposal of the Petition, the Municipal Corporation is bound to take action in accordance with law for demolition of the illegal structure constructed on Survey No.72/3 of village Nagaon, (City Survey No.342) at Bhiwandi, District Thane. Subject to what is observed above, the Petition is disposed of. (P.N. DESHMUKH, J) (A.S. OKA, J)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5645 OF 2009 Mahesh Vasant Borse ..Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & anr. ..Respondents None for the petitioner Mr.S.N.Patil, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent Nos.1 & 2 CORAM : S.B.MHASE & R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 2ND SEPTEMBER,2009 P.C. . The matter pertains to the recruitment of the Police Constable. The petitioner has undergone the Selection Process and was not selected. Thereafter, he has filed this Writ Petition. The grievance of the petitioner is that he belongs to Other Backward Class Category and also possesses Non Creamylayer Certificate. His case should have been considered by the respondents in Other Backward Class Category. The respondents have filed an Affidavit in this respect and it is stated that at the time of the scrutiny of the document, the petitioner had not possessed Non Creamylayer Certificate and therefore, the petitioner had agreed to the inclusion of his name in the Open Category. Accordingly, he has given a statement to that effect. Therefore, he was considered in the Open Category. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the above Writ Petition. The above Writ Petition is accordingly rejected. ( R.M.SAVANT, J.) ( S.B.MHASE, J. )

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. Writ Petition No.3488 Of 2013. Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat :: Petitioner. -------------------------- ---- ------------- Versus. Zhilla Parishad Satara & Ors. :: Respondents. •• itespondents. Appearance :- Mr. Matugade i/b. Mr. Sugandh Deshmukh, Advocate for the Petitioner. None present for the Respondents. Coram :: V.M. Kanade, & F.M. Reis, JJ. Date :: th April, 2013. 8 P.C. : Issue notice to the respondents returnable after four weeks. (F.M. REIS, J.) (V.M. KANADE,J.) 1

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELATE AND ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S.OKA, & G.S.PATEL,JJ. DATE : JULY 19,2013 P.C.: . The following matters on Balance BoardDaily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. The matters will appear on the dates as may be fixed by C.M.I.S. Sr.No. C.M.I.S.Date 42,43,44,901 31/07/2013 45,46,47,49,53,58,59,60,61,62, 63,64,65,904 01/08/13 50,51,52,905 02/08/13 54 05/08/13 55,56,57,910,911,912,913,914,915 08/08/13 . If in any of the above matters, ad interim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates. If adinterim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected. (G.S.PATEL,J.) (A.S.OKA,J.)

Order - Status 11: agk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE AND ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER FOR BALANCE DAILY / SUPPLEMENTARY BOARD DATED 1st AUGUST 2013 CORAM : A.S. Oka, & G.S. Patel, JJ. DATE : 1 st August 2013 P.C. : The following matters on Balance Board / Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. The matters will appear on the dates as may be fixed by C.M.I.S. Sr. Nos. C.M.I.S. Date 7, 54, 71, 72, 73, 74, 85, 89, 91 12/08/13 51, 52, 66, 90, 904, 906, 907, 909, 911, 913, 915, 916, 917, 918, 919, 920, 921, 922 16/08/13 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70, 78, 79 28/08/13 75, 76, 77, 88, 901 13/08/13 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 87, 912, 914 29/08/13 86 27/09/13 If in any of the above matters, adinterim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates. If adinterim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected. (G.S. Patel, J.) (A.S. Oka, J.)

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S.OKA & G.S.PATEL, JJ DATE : 16TH AUGUST 2013 P.C: . On account of paucity of time, rest of the matters on daily board and supplementary board stand adjourned on the dates fixed as per the CMIS. Sr. Nos. Adjourned date 57 ) 21st September 2013 58 ) 23rd September 2013 60, 61, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72 and 73 ) ) 19th September 2013 62, 71, 76, 80, 81, 87, 92, 94, 95, 97, 98, 99, 903 and 904 ) ) 30th August 2013 74, 75, 77, 78, 79, 82, 84, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 93, 905 and 906 ) ) 20th September 2013 83 and 85 ) 21st October 2013 96 and 901 ) 26th August 2013 If any adinterim or interim relief granted in the aforesaid matters is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the dates which are fixed under this order. If there is an extreme urgency, the parties can get the papers produced before the Court. (G.S.PATEL, J) ( A.S. OKA, J ) ---------------- -----------------

Order - Status 15: 903,906,907,909,910n912 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S.OKA & REVATI MOHITE­DERE, JJ DATE : 30TH AUGUST 2013 P.C: . On account of paucity of time, rest of the matters on daily board and supplementary board stand adjourned on the dates fixed as per the CMIS. Sr. Nos. Adjourned date 50, 51, 52 and 54 ) rd October 2013 3 53 and 902 ) 12th September 2013 55, 56, 60, 910 and 912 ) th October 2013 4 57, 58, 59, 61, 62, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 903, 906 and 907 ) ) 20th September 2013 63 ) 25th September 2013 64 ) 19th October 2013 901 ) 26th September 2013 909 ) 21st September 2013 If any adinterim or interim relief granted in the aforesaid matters is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the dates which are fixed under this order. If any adinterim or interim order is to operate till further orders, such orders shall remain unaffected. If there is an extreme urgency, the parties can get the papers produced before the Court. (REVATI MOHITEDERE, J) ( A.S. OKA, J )

Order - Status 17: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELATE AND ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S.OKA, & REVATI MOHITE DERE,JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 20,2013 P.C.: . The following matters on Balance BoardDaily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. The matters will appear on the dates as may be fixed by C.M.I.S. Sr.No. C.M.I.S.Date 27,28,29,30,31,42,50,54,55,57,58,59, 64,65,66,70,71,74,904,905,906,907 07/10/2013 32,33,34,35,36,910 19.10.2013 37,38,39,40,41,43,44,45,46,47,48,49, 51,52,53,56,60,61,62,67 21.10.2013 68, 72 28.11.2013 69,76,77,78,80,85 22.10.2013 73 29.11.2013 75,79,81,82,83,84,86,87 08/10/13 901 01/10/13 902, 903 04/10/13 . If in any of the above matters, ad interim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates. If adinterim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected.

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S.OKA & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ DATE : 07th OCTOBER, 2013 P.C: . On account of paucity of time, rest of the matters on daily board and supplementary board stand adjourned on the dates fixed as per the CMIS. Sr. Nos. Adjourned date 43, 44, 45, 46, 47 ) 23rd October, 2013 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 61, 69, 70, 74, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81 ) 24th October, 2013 59 ) 15th November, 2013 60 ) 18th October, 2013 62, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68, 71, 72, 73, 75, 82, 92 19th October, 2013 64 ) 22nd October, 2013 83, 84, 86, 88, 89, 91 25th October, 2013 90, 93 ) 05th December, 2013 If any adinterim or interim relief granted in the aforesaid matters is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the dates which are fixed under this order. If interim relief or adinterim relief is not granted for limited duration, the said orders will remain unaffected. If there is an extreme urgency, the parties can get the papers produced before the Court. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J) ( A.S. OKA, J )

Order - Status 21: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : A.S. OKA AND REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 24, 2013. P.C. On account of paucity of time, as this Court was required to take up final hearing Board in the afternoon session, rest of the matters on daily board and supplementary board stand adjourned on the dates fixed as per the CMIS, as mentioned below: Sr. Nos. Adjourned date/CMIS Date 36, 37, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 ) 18th November, 2013 38, 41 ) rd 3 December, 2013 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, ) 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 901, ) 19th November, 2013 69, 70, 71, 72, 80, 81, 85, 89, 91, 92, ) 94, 95, 96, 904, 905 ) 20th November, 2013 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 84, 86, 87, ) 88, 90, 93, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, ) 103, 105, 906 ) ) ) ) th December, 2013 4 82, 83, 104, 107, 108 ) 11th November, 2013 106 ) 28th November, 2013 If any ad-interim or interim relief granted in the aforesaid matters is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the dates which are fixed under this order. If interim relief or ad-interim relief is not granted for limited duration, the said orders will remain unaffected. If there is an extreme urgency, the parties can get the papers produced before the Court. (REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.) (A. S. OKA, J.)

Order - Status 27: Dond IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (Mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ..Petitioner. Vs. Zilla Parishad, Satara & Anr. ..Respondents. ----- Mr. A.V. Anturkar, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Tanaji Mahatugde i/b Mr. S.B. Deshmukh for Petitioner. Mr. Uday P. Warunjikar a/w Mr. Bhushan Deshmukh for Respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr. C.P. Yadav, AGP for State. CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL & A.S. GADKARI, JJ. DATE : 13th January 2015. P.C. Leave to add the State as party-Respondent. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. Learned AGP waives service for the State. 2 Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is under suspension since 5th February 2013 consequent to the impugned order dated 5th February 2013 on the allegations of the incident which is described in the said order. It is submitted that the impugned order be stayed as it is passed without authority of law and even on merits, the order of suspension is not sustainable. 3 The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1-Zilla Parishad states that the Zilla Parishad has forwarded the proposal to the State government after holding preliminary enquiry by a communication dated 23rd April 2013 in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 28th March 2012. So far the State Government has not communicated its decision. 4 The facts reveal that on the incident which is reflected in the impugned order, the Medical Officer has been suspended and she continues to be under the suspension since 5th February 2013. So far no enquiry has been initiated against her. We find appropriate in the facts of the case that until further orders, the services of the Medical Officer could be made available to the rural people. 5 Prima facie, we are convinced to pass the following order: By way of an interim order, we stay the order of suspension. The Petitioner shall report to her duties at the earliest. 6 Stand over to 3rd February 2015. (A.S. GADKARI, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.) wp.3488-2013

Order - Status 29: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 15th December, 2016 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 22/12/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 31: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 22nd December, 2016 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 05/01/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 32: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 5th January, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 12/01/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 34: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 12th January, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 19/01/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 36: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 19th January, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 02/02/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 38: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 2nd February, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 09/02/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 39: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 9th February, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 16/02/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 41: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 23rd February, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 02/03/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 43: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 2nd March, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 09/03/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 45: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 9th March, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time Stand Over to 16/03/2017. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 47: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 16th March, 2017 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Ad-interim relief, if any, to continue till then. Stand over to 22/03/2017 on Supplementary Board. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 49: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ....Petitioner V/S Zilla Parishad, Satara And Anr ....Respondent Mr.Tanaji Mhatugade i/by Mr.Sugandh B. Deshmukh Advocate for Petitioner. Mr.Uday P. Warunjikar Advocate for Respondent No.1 And 2. Ms.Sushma Bhende AGP for Respondent No.3. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 22nd March, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 24/03/2017 for Passing Orders. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 53: 904.wp.3488.13.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3488 OF 2013 Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat (Mrs. Sunita Nilesh Patil) ..Petitioner Vs. Zilla Parishad, Satara and Others ..Respondents Mr. Anil V. Anturkar, Senior Counsel i/b Mr. Sugandh B. Deshmukh, for the Petitioner. Mr. Uday P. Warunjikar, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Ms. Sushma Bhnde, AGP, for the State. CORAM :- S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & B.P.COLABAWALLA, JJ. DATE :- MARCH 24, 2017. P. C.: The Petitioner at the relevant time was posted at Primary Health Center and which was controlled by the Satara Zilla Parishad. 2 An order of suspension was issued by the then Chief Executive Officer of that Zilla Parishad on 5th February, 2013, which is under challenge. 3 While dealing with the challenge at ad-interim stage, a Division Bench of this Court passed the following order:- " Leave to add the State as party-Respondent. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. Learned AGP waives service for the State. 2 Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is under suspension since 5th February 2013 consequent to the impugned order dated 5th February 2013 on the allegations of theincident which is described in the said order. It is submitted that the impugned order be stayed as it is passed without authority of law and even on merits, the order of suspension is not sustainable. 3 The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1-Zilla Parishad states that the Zilla Parishad has forwarded the proposal to the State government after holding preliminary enquiry by a communication dated 23rd April 2013 in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 28th March 2012. So far the State Government has not communicated its decision. 4 The facts reveal that on the incident which is reflected in the impugned order, the Medical Officer has been suspended and she continues to be under the suspension since 5th February 2013. So far no enquiry has been initiated against her. We find appropriate in the facts of the case that until further orders, the services of the Medical Officer could be made available to the rural people. 5 Prima facie, we are convinced to pass the following order: By way of an interim order, we stay the order of suspension. The Petitioner shall report to her duties at the earliest. 6 Stand over to 3rd February 2015." 4 That order is operative till date. 5 Mr. Warunjikar on the earlier occasion had sought time to take instructions and revert back to this Court as to whether the Petitioner indeed was allowed to report for duties. 6 Mr. Warunjikar produces photocopy of a communication received from the Satara Zilla Parishad and particularly signed by the District Health Officer dated 23rd March, 2017. That indicates that Dr. Sunita Suresh Thorat now Mrs Sunita Nilesh Patil has been allowed to report for work but after permitting her to resume duties at the very Primary Health Center, later on, the District Health Officer has posted the Petitioner at some other Primary Health Center. She has, therefore, reported for work by joining duties at that Primary Health Center. The instructions are that the Petitioner is allowed to work. 7 In the light of the ad-interim order passed by this Court which ensures that a Primary Health Center has services of a qualified Doctor and particularly a lady Doctor, Aswale 3/5 we do not wish to proceed with this Writ Petition any further. The Petitioner admittedly was on deputation and to this health services of the Satara Zilla Parishad. She is stating that she is a State Government employee. The Satara Zilla Parishad is awaiting instructions from the Government as to whether the Satara Zilla Parishad can enquire into a misconduct of the Petitioner or it would be the employer who has appointed her on a substantive post who is empowered to hold such enquiry. 8 We only direct that if any written proposal for initiating a disciplinary enquiry against the Petitioner and from the Satara Zilla Parishad is pending consideration of the State Government, the Competent Authority therein should take a decision on this proposal and as expeditiously as possible. We direct that the decision be taken within two months, if such written proposal is pending consideration. 9 We dispose off the Writ Petition by confirming the ad-interim order but at the same time clarifying that neither Aswale 4/5 have we expressed any opinion on whether the Petitioner has committed any misconduct nor have we expressed our view on the powers of any particular authority to hold such disciplinary enquiry. Therefore, the issue of maintainability of such proceedings, jurisdiction of authority and equally the contentions on the merits of the charges, are kept open. They shall be gone into uninfluenced by the order in the Writ Petition. We take on record a communication addressed to Mr. Warunjikar and mark it "X" for identification. (B. P. COLABAWALLA, J.) (S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6285 OF 2017 Shri. Ajay Rajendra Pawar ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent Suresh M Sabrad For Petitioner Mrs.R.M.Shinde,A.G.P.for state. CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & M.S. SONAK, JJ DATE : 14th June, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 12/07/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6285 OF 2017 Shri. Ajay Rajendra Pawar ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent Suresh M Sabrad For Petitioner Shri P.P. More, AGP for State. CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & M.S. SONAK, JJ DATE : 12th July, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 13/07/2017 under the caption of withdrawal. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6285 OF 2017 Ajay R. Pawar ..Petitioner Vs The State of Maharashtra and ors. ..Respondents Mr. S.M. Sabrad for the Petitioner Mr. P.P. More, AGP for the Respondents – State. CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & M. S. SONAK, JJ. DATE : JULY 13, 2017. P.C. : . The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No.1 while passing the impugned order dated 6th May 2016 did not consider the Government Resolution (G.R.) dated 12th March 2013 (ExhibitW), the report dated 16th February 2016 of the Additional Collector and the various judgments passed by this Court from time to time. 2] We find that there is no mention about consideration of the said G.R., report of the Additional Collector as also the judgments on which the petitioner has placed reliance. In the circumstances, we allow the petitioner to withdraw this petition with liberty to the petitioner to file a review petition before respondent No.1. The petitioner may file the review petition within two weeks. 3] Needless to say that we have not commented upon the merits on the petitioner's entitlement. The respondent No.1 is free to decide the review petition, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible but not later than three months from the date of filing of such review petition. 4] With aforesaid liberty, the petition is allowed to be withdrawn. (M. S. SONAK, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)

Order - Status 6: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 924 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's Orders Orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.P.K.Dhakephalkar Sr.Adv i/by. Ajay Patil for the petitioners. Mr.J.A.Shah for the respondents. CORAM: S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED: 11TH FEBRUARY,2008. P.C. : 1.This petition is by the original defendant in Short Cause Suit No. 987 of 2006. She applied for staying of hearing of this suit until her suit being RAD Suit No. 829 of 2006 is decided by the court of Small Causes. That application is rejected by the impugned order. 2.After the matter was argued for some time, Mr.Dhakephalkar learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner does not press the matter, insofar as , the relief of stay of suit is concerned. Even otherwise the suit in the Civil court and the Court of exclusive jurisdiction containing distinct reliefs, so also, the powers in law being not identical that relief has been rightly refused. However, insofar as , the issue of jurisdiction is concerned, the Trial court to frame the issue of jurisdiction in Suit No. 987 of 2006 and decide the same alongwith other issues on its own merits and in accordance with law without being influenced by the order passed on the application of stay made under Section 10 of CPC. All contentions of both sides are kept open. Petition dismissed, subject to above directions. No order as to costs. sd/- (JUDGE)

Order - Status 5: 24-WP-6807-2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6807 OF 2022 Sanjay Hanuman Pandey .. Petitioner Versus Union of India and Ors. .. Respondents ******* Mr. A.M. Saraogi for the Petitioner. Mr. D.P.Singh for Respondent No. 1-UOI. Mr. Y.D.Patil, AGP for the State. ******* CORAM: A. A. SAYED & ABHAY AHUJA, JJ. DATE : 13 th JUNE,2022 P.C. :- Registry to verify and place the matter before the appropriate Bench. (ABHAY AHUJA, J.) (A. A. SAYED, J.) YUGANDHARA SHARAD PATIL Digitally signed by YUGANDHARA SHARAD PATIL Date: 2022.06.15 14:12:07 +0530

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6807 OF 2022 Sanjay Hanuman Pandey ....PETITIONER V/S Union Of India And Ors ....RESPONDENT Ashok M. Saraogi for Petitioner Mrs. S. S. Bhende, AGP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.V. GANGAPURWALA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R. N. LADDHA, JJ DATE : 12th September, 2022 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Petitioner , stand over to 17/10/2022 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6807 OF 2022 ……. Sanjay Hanuman Pandey … Petitioner. V/s. Union of India and Others … Respondents. Mr. Ashok M. Saraogi for the Petitioner. Ms R. A. Salunkhe, AGP for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Mr. Anil K. Singh i/b Mr. D. P. Singh for Respondent No. 1. ……. CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR, AND MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 25 September 2023. P.C. : The learned Counsel for the Petitioner states that there are substantial amendments will have to be carried out to pursue the petition further. He states that the petition would be withdrawn and petition joining the correct parties and giving particulars would be filed. In view of this prayer, the writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn as above. (MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4666 OF 2005 Sangli Miraj Kupwad Cities Municipal ) Corporation, Sangli and another ).. Petitioners Versus Mahapalika Kamgar Sabha ).. Respondent Mr.N.V.Walawalkar for the Petitioners. Mr.S.M.Dharap with Mr.Helekar for the Respondent. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 21ST JULY 2005 P.C.: . Leave to amend. This Petition is directed against the order dated 4th April 2005 passed below Exhibit U-13 in Reference (IT) No.6 of 1996 by the Industrial Tribunal, Sangli. According to the Petitioners, the Reference was made between the Miraj Municipal Council and the Miraj Kamgar Union. However, the Miraj Municipal Council is now functioning as a Municipal Corporation and, therefore, according to the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, some of the demands which have been referred may not be applicable and cannot be decided by the Tribunal. He submits that, for instance, Demand No.8 is in respect of the permanency of workmen. The Corporation will now have to decide the seniority based on all employees and not just of Miraj Municipal Council. The Corporation is made up of several Municipal Councils and, therefore, seniority of all the employees will have to be determined. This submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioners cannot be accepted. Permanency is a dispute which is between those specific employees and the Council which is now functioning as a Municipal Corporation. After these workmen are made permanent, it is always open for the Corporation to decide the inter-se seniority of all the workmen including that of other Municipal Councils who are now their employees. The other submission made on behalf of the Petitioners is that the Tribunal cannot decide the Reference in view of the new Corporation coming into existence by the merger of three Municipal Councils. It is submitted that the scope of the Reference is enlarged by incorporating the Petitioners as a party to the Reference. The Industrial Tribunal has considered the provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 and has rightly not accepted this submission of the Petitioners. Hence, Writ Petition rejected.