1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7085 OF 2010 Gumansingh s/o Lachhya Barde Age 52 years, Occ. Service, R/o 23/A, Raysarthi Colony, Walwadi Shivar, Gandoor Road, Deopur, Dhule, District Dhule. ... PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary, Department of Industry, Energy & Labour, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32 2. Development Commissioner (Industries), Directorate of Industries, New Administrative Building, Opposite Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32 (Copies of respondent Nos.1 & 2 to be served through office of Government Pleader, Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad) ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri S.S. Phatale, Advocate holding for Shri M.S. Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioner Shri S.K. Kadam, A.G.P. for respondents ..... CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED: 6th August, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V. HARDAS, J.): 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent 2 of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent No.2 – Development Commissioner (Industries), Maharashtra State, Mumbai to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner on 9.12.2009. By the aforesaid representation, the petitioner has sought deemed date of promotion and has raised several grounds justifying the grant of the said relief. 3. In the light of the pendency of the said representation, submitted by the petitioner, we are inclined to allow this writ petition and accordingly, allow this petition and direct the respondent No.2 to decide the said representation of the petitioner, if pending, in accordance with law, within period of four months from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. 4. Rule is made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. (N.D. DESHPANDE, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.)