wp894.11 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 894 OF 2011 Raju s/o Ukhardu Mali Age major, Occ. Nil, R/o. At present Central Prison Aurangabad Tq. and dist. Aurangabad ...Petitioner Versus 1 The State of Maharashtra Through Divisional Commissioner Aurangabad, (Copy will be served to the APP Bombay High Court Bench at Aurangabad) 2 Law Officer, Superintendent of Prison, Maharashtra State, Pune 3 Superintendent, Central Prison, Aurangabad 4 Superintendent, Open Prison Paithan, District Aurangabad ...Respondents ..... Mr. S.B. Choudhari, advocate for the petitioner Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, APP for respondents ..... CORAM : S. B. DESHMUKH AND A.M. THIPSAY, JJ. DATED : 20TH DECEMBER, 2011 wp894.11 -2- JUDGMENT (PER DESHMUKH, J.) :- 1 Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of the parties, heard finally. 3 In response to the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondent, which is sworn in by Mr. Vaibhav Sahebrao Kamble, Superintendent, Central Prison, Aurangabad, learned counsel for the petitioner, took us through the earlier order passed by this Court (Coram: P.V. Hardas and A.V. Potdar, JJ.) in Criminal writ petition No. 440 of 2011 on 12.7.2011. It seems that earlier, the present petitioner had made an application for shifting him to open prison. The said application was rejected. That order was challenged by filing Criminal writ petition No.440 of 2011. The said writ petition has been heard and disposed of by this court by order dated 12.7.2011. From para 5 of the said order, it appears that this court had quashed and set aside the orders dated 15.5.2010 and 21.6.2010, which were impugned in that writ petition. However, the direction was given to the authorities to decide the case of the petitioner afresh, in accordance with law, by taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has been acquitted in pending criminal case. After passing the said order, it appears that wp894.11 -3- on 15.9.2011, the present petitioner/prisoner has addressed a letter to the Registry of this Court. The said letter is registered as criminal writ petition. 4 By earlier order, the notice was issued. The learned counsel Mr. S.B. Choudhari, was appointed by this Court. He has placed on record the formal memo of writ petition. 5 The learned APP Mr. Gondhalekar, points out the contents in para 8 and submitted that "the petitioner is qualified for transfer to open prison by the Open Prison Selection Committee held at Aurangabad Central Prison on 18.10.2011". The said communication is annexed to the affidavit in reply. The further statement is made that the petitioner will be transferred to open prison, as per the seniority list and the vacancy in the open prison. 6 In the light of the solemn statement made in para 8 of the affidavit in reply, in our opinion, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ petition. The prayers made in this petition have been virtually accepted by the authorities. We are therefore, inclined to dispose of the writ petition, in view of the solemn statement made in para 8 of the affidavit in reply. wp894.11 -4- 7 The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. 8 We quantify the fees payable to the learned counsel Mr. S.B. Choudhari, for conducting this matter, at Rs.2000/-. *****