1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 584 OF 2010 Jamsingh s/o Jalamsingh Jarhade ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ...Respondents ..... Mr. R.S. Shinde, advocate for the petitioner (appointed) Mr. N.R. Shaikh, A.P.P. for respondents ..... CORAM: S.B. DESHMUKH & S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATED: 16TH JULY, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 We heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 3 By way of this petition, the petitioner prisoner seeks a writ of mandamus against the respondent authorities to consider and decide his application dated 27.2.2009, filed for parole leave. 4 In response to the notice of the writ petition, affidavit in reply on 2 behalf of the respondents is filed. It is affirmed by Mr. Govind Phulsing Chavan, Tahsildar, working in the office of Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad. Learned A.P.P. Mr. Shaikh points out para 5 of the reply in which assurance is given that within one week, the parole leave application of the petitioner will be decided. We accept the contention made in para 5 of the reply. 5 In our view, nothing remains to be adjudicated upon in this petition. The petition can be disposed of with direction to the authorities that they shall decide the application of the petitioner for parole leave on or before 2.8.2010. Writ petition is accordingly partly allowed. Respondents are directed to dispose of the parole leave application filed by the petitioner on or before 2.8.2010 in accordance with law. 6 We quantify an amount of Rs.2000/- towards the legal fees and expenses to be paid to advocate Mr. R.S. Shinde, appointed by the Court. Rule made absolute in the above terms. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) (S.B. DESHMUKH, J.) rlj/