1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO: 897/2006 (Smt. Sushma Saurkar vs. State of Maharashtra and others) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram Court's or Judges Order appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders. .................................................................................................................................................................. Mr. Jibhkate, Adv. for petitioner; Mrs.Jog, AGP for Respondents 1 and 2 Mr.Mohgaonkar, Adv.for Respondents 4 and 5 CORAM: A.P.LAVANDE & R.V.MORE, JJ. DATED: 25 th JULY, 2007 . *** 1. This Petition has been primarily filed by the petitioner being aggrieved by refusal of respondents 1 to 3 to grant pensionary benefits to the petitioner. By communication dated 16.2.2002, the Secretary, Department of Social Justice, Cultural Activities, Sports & Special Grants Department Mumbai, addressed to Lok Ayukta, dealing with the grievance of the petitioner, stated that the Department wanted to verify other cases of pension which were pending and appropriate policy decision would be taken, instead of taking decision in individual cases. In view of the said statement made, Mr. 2 Jibhkate learned counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner would not press other reliefs except relief (iii-a) which reads as under : (a) direct the respondent no.1 to consider the grievance of the petitioner regarding her pensionary benefits, sympathetically and take decision on the same within stipulated period, in view of the statement made in the order dated 16.02.2002 (Annx. VI), by suitable and appropriate writ or direction.” 2. Mrs. Jog, learned AGP for respondents has no objection if the petition is allowed in terms of Prayer Clause (iii-a). 3. In view of the statement made by Ms. Jog learned AGP for Respondents 1 to 3, we direct Respondent No.1 to consider the grievance of the petitioner regarding her pensionary benefits on its own merit and take a decision on the same within a period of 12 weeks from the date the order is communicated to Respondent No1. It is made clear that the petition itself will be treated as representation made by the petitioner. Mrs. Jog states states that she will send copy of the petition along with copy of this order to Respondent No.1 within a week. 4. Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms, 3 with no order as to costs. 5. Certified copy expedited. JUDGE JUDGE sahare