1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 606 OF 2010 Shirish Baburao Gujar ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ...Respondents ..... Miss. Rashmi P. Gour, advocate for the petitioner Mr. V.D. Godbharle, A.P.P. for respondents ..... CORAM: S.B. DESHMUKH & S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATED: 10TH AUGUST, 2010 PER COURT:- 1 We heard learned counsel for the parties 2 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 3 The petitioner approached this Court with following prayers;- A This Criminal writ petition may kindly be allowed. 2 B The petitioner may kindly be transferred to Swatantrapur Open Colony, Atpadi, District Sangli from District Open Jail, Paithan. C As the petitioner is in jail, the affidavit may kindly be dispensed with. D Any other equitable relief may please be granted in favour of the petitioner. 4 In response to the notice issued by this Court, affidavit in reply on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 4 is filed. It is sworn in by Mr. Ashok Shankar Kadam, Jail Group II, Open Prison, Paithan, District Aurangabad. Learned A.P.P. points out para 8 of the reply. In said para, a statement is made that other prisoners who are eligible and willing to go to Swatantrapur Open Colonies, Atpadi, District Sangli are also being identified by calling their willingness. Such letter is quoted as dated 5.7.2010. The information as sought for from four open prisons situated at Paithan, Aurangabad, Morshi and Yerwada. The statement further discloses that on receipt of this information, a committee will be constituted under the Chairmanship of Inspector General of Prisons, Pune and decision will be taken. 5 Learned counsel for the petitioner points out agony of the 3 petitioner, who is undergoing the punishment inflicted upon him by the competent Court for the offence punishable under Section 302 of I.P.C. Learned A.P.P. submitted that the prayer, which is made by the petitioner, cannot be insisted upon like a fundamental right under the Constitution. Even it is not statutory right vested with the petitioner. He therefore, seeks four months time to take decision on the prayer made by the petitioner. 6 After hearing counsel for the petitioner, in our view, this petition can be disposed of with directions to the respondents to take decision on the prayer made by the petitioner, on or before 15.11.2010 and decision to be communicated to the petitioner within two weeks thereafter. 7 Writ petition is partly allowed. Respondents are directed to take decision on the request made by the petitioner on or before 15.11.2010 and communicate the decision to the petitioner within two weeks thereafter. 8 Writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. No costs. Rule made absolute accordingly. ( S. S. SHINDE. J.) (S.B. DESHMUKH, J.) rlj/ 4