(1) Criwp458-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 458 OF 2010 Bhimrao s/o Dadarao Sutar PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.G. Magre, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. B.V. Wagh, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State. Mr. Vishant P. Kadam, advocate for respondent No. 3. ..... CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 5th APRIL, 2011 ORAL ORDER: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction to respondent No. 2 to decide his representation dated 9th March, 2010 within time-frame. We have perused the writ petition and the annexures thereto. We do not wish to examine merits of the allegations made against respondent Nos. 3 and 4. We also do not wish to express any opinion as to whether the Government should proceed against respondent Nos. 3 and 4, as prayed for in the representation dated 9th March, 2010. The only (2) Criwp458-10 grievance made by learned counsel for the petitioner before us is that the representation has not been considered by respondent No. 2 till this date. In the circumstances, we dispose of this writ petition by issuing the following direction. "Respondent No. 2 shall consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 9th March, 2010 (Exhibit-A, at page 13 of the writ petition) and pass appropriate orders expeditiously. While passing this order, we shall not be understood to have issued any direction on merits to the concerned Authority. The concerned Authority shall consider the representation in accordance with law. With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of." [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [D.B. BHOSALE, J.] NPJ/criwp458-10