Full Judgment
W.P.No.3345/12 24/09/12 Shri L.N.Sakle, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri S.A.Dharmadhikari, learned counsel for respondent No.3.
As per the instructions issued by this Court, learned counsel for the petitioner has handed over an advance copy of the notice to the learned counsel for the respondent No.3, who has obtained the instructions from the concerned respondent.
The claim made by the petitioner is that the controveRs.involved in the present case is decided by a Division Bench decision rendered in W.P.No.18525/2006 (s) (Vinot Kumar Dhangar versus Co-operative Department and others).It is stated that a representation is made by the petitioner before the concerned respondent for granting the benefit of the said order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, yet the same is not being considered, therefore, he has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 fairly states that in case, after consideration, if it is found that the petitioner is also similarly placed person, as was the case of Vinot Kumar Dhangar, he too will be granted the benefit extended by this Court in the case of Vinot Kumar Dhangar (supra).The said exercise be completed within a period of two months and the petitioner be granted the benefits, if he is found entitled within the said period.
With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is finally disposed of.C.C.
as per rules.
(Rajendra Menon) Judge Vy/-