1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.486 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1511 OF 2011 Vilas Tatoba Ghag .. Petitioner V/s The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Shriram Shirsat for the petitioner. Mrs.M.M.Deshmukh, APP for the State. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. DATE: 15th November, 2011. P.C.: 1. This application is filed in a disposed of Writ Petition No.1511 of 2011. The said petition was disposed of in terms of the order dated 09.09.2011. The grievance in this application is that the Respondent Nos.1 & 4 have not complied with the said order. 2. It is contended that the copy of the order of the competent authority dated 06.01.2011 rejecting the petitioner’s proposal for transferring him to the open prison, has still not been communicated to the petitioner. What has been communicated is only the letter of the officer informing that the petitioner’s application has been rejected. According to the petitioner, in all 2 probability, no such decision has been taken by the competent authority and even if taken, no reasons have been recorded. 3. It is not possible for us to entertain this grievance in the disposed of writ petition. Moreover, the issue regarding transfer of convicts to the open prison has already been addressed by this Court and the general directions have been given to the authorities vide order dated 21.10.2010 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No. 2015 of 2010 in the case of Ravindra Vitthal Patil V/s. The Superintendent, Yerawada Central Prison, Pune & Another. The authorities are obliged to comply with the said directions. In other words, the petitioner’s case can be considered by the authorities for transfer to open prison only if the petitioner is due for the same as per his seniority and if he fulfills all the requirements for being transferred to the open prison. 4. Be that as it may, the authorities are free to furnish copy of the order dated 06.01.2011 to the petitioner. If the petitioner is justified in stating that no reasons have been recorded by the appropriate authority, it would be open to the appropriate authority to record the reasons ex post facto, and to communicate the same to the petitioner, if not already done. 3 5. It is not necessary to address any other issue in the present application. Application is disposed of. This would not affect the remedy available of the petitioner to challenge the decision of the appropriate authority before the concerned forum as per the liberty granted to the petitioner in terms of the order dated 09.09.2011. (R.G.KETKAR, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)