1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3007 OF 2010 Mahadeo S/o Maruti Bhandwalkar } Age : 42 Years, Occ. : Service, } in Loknayak Jaiprakash Narayan } Madhyamik & Dr.G.D. Saptrashri } Higher Secondary College, Khed } Nagar, Taluka : Karjat, } Dist. : Ahmednagar. } .... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra } Through its Secretary } Education Department, } Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. } 2. The Director of Education } Central Building, Pune. } 3. Deputy Director of Education } Pune Region, Pune. } .... RESPONDENTS Mr. A.N.Kakade, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.K.Tambe, Additional Govt. Pleader for State. CORAM : P.V.HARDAS & S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 12/04/2010 2 ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER – S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.) 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. We have heard Mr. A.N.Kakade, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. S.K.Tambe, learned Assistant Govt. Pleader for State. 3. Vide the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays that the representation which he has filed with respondent no. 3 be decided within stipulated period. 4. In view of the fact that the limited prayer has been made and that the representation is pending consideration with the respondent no. 3 since 17/8/2009, we direct respondent no. 3 to decide the said representation within period of six months from today and communicate decision thereon to the petitioner. 5. Rule is thus made absolute in the above terms with no order as to costs. [ S.V.GANGAPURWALA ] [ P.V.HARDAS ] JUDGE JUDGE knp/WP 3007.10 ( J ) 3