1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.4347 OF 2009 The Yawal Municipal Council, Through its President, Shri Shashank Prabhakar Deshpande, Age : 45 years, Occu. Business, R/o Yawal, Tq. Yawal, District Jalgaon ..PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary Municipal Administrative, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2. The Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik 3. The Collector, Jalgaon, District Jalgaon 4. The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon ..RESPONDENTS Mr A.B. Girase, Advocate for the petitioner; Mr K.J. Ghute Patil, AGP for respondents. CORAM: P.V. HARDAS AND R.K.DESHPANDE, JJ. 2 DATE : 10TH JULY, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT: [PER P.V. HARDAS, J.] Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent 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 Collector, Jalgaon to decide the proceedings under section 308 (1) of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships Act, 1965. 3. It appears that the Municipal Council by its resolution dated 24.2.2006 granted approval for issuance of necessary appointment orders and accordingly appointment orders were issued to persons appointing them as Shikshan Sevak and the Education Officer (Secondary) granted approval. On 10.5.2006 the Collector, Jalgaon issued notice calling the report of the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Yaval. The Collector, Jalgaon ultimately by his order dated 31.5.2007 suspended the resolution as according to the respondent – Collector it was not in accordance with law. The order of the Collector suspending the said resolution came to be challenged by the petitioner by filing proceedings before the Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik, who by his order dated 30.8.2007 remitted the matter back to the Collector for a decision afresh. Since then, according to the 3 petitioner the proceedings are pending before the Collector, Jalgaon and have not been decided. 4. We have heard Shri Girase, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri K.J. Ghute Patil, learned A.G.P. for respondents. 5. In the light of that, therefore, we allow this petition and direct the respondent – Collector to decide the pending proceedings within four months from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. 6. Rule is made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. [ R.K. DESHPANDE, J ] [ P.V. HARDAS, J ] amj/wp4347.09 4