1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 901 OF 2009 Akhileshkumar S/o Sharad Mishra Age : Major, Occu.: Nil, Prisoner No. 4158, presently in Central Jail, Harsul, Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad through the Secretary District Legal Services Authority, Aurangabad ... Petitioner V E R S U S 1] The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 2] The Inspector General (Prisons) State of Maharashtra Central Building, Pune-411 001 3] The Jail Superintendent Central Prison, Harsul Aurangabad (Copy to all the respondents to be served on the Govt. Pleader, High Court, Bench at Aurangabad) ... Respondents ... Mr. K.C. Sant, Advocate for Petitioner Mr. V.D. Godbharle, A.P.P. for respondent-State CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND A.V.NIRGUDE, JJ. DATED : 9TH NOVEMBER,2009 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : P.V. HARDAS, J.) 1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the 2 parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2] The communication sent by the petitioner through Jail has been directed to be registered as a Criminal Writ Petition. In the aforesaid communication, the petitioner who is a prisoner undergoing imprisonment of sentence for life has expressed an apprehension that the Jail authorities intend to transfer him from Paithan Jail to some other Jail. This petition was accordingly registered as Criminal Writ Petition and notices came to be issued to the respondents. 3] Learned APP on behalf of the respondents states that the petitioner is presently at Paithan and has submitted an application requesting for his transfer from Paithan Open Jail to Yerwada Jail. The aforesaid application of the petitioner is under consideration of the authorities. Since the petitioner has not been transferred and the respondents do not intend to transfer the petitioner without following the process of law, according to us the, the apprehension expressed by 3 the petitioner is completely unfounded. In the light of that fact, we are therefore, not inclined to interfere in this petition. 4] Mr. Sant learned counsel appointed on behalf of the petitioner states that the petitioner has submitted an application for his transfer to Yerwada Jail out of sheer frustration on account of the attitude of the respondent authorities. Since the petitioner has already submitted an application and has not taken any steps for the withdrawal of the same, we are not inclined to interfere at this stage. 5] We thus see no merit in the petition and the petition is therefore summarily dismissed with no orders as to costs. We however, quantify the fees payable to Shri K.C. Sant learned counsel for the petitioner at Rs.3000/- (Rs. Three Thousand). Rule stands discharged. Sd/- Sd/- (A.V.NIRGUDE, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) arp