1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.46 OF 2008 Mr. Dadabhau Namdeo Jadhav ..... Petitioner. v/s The State of Maharashtra & anr. ..... Respondents. ------ Mr. J.P. Kharge for the Petitioner. Mr. P.M. Patil, AGP for respondent No.1. ------ CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. AND V.M.KANADE, J. DATE : 19TH JUNE, 2008. P.C.: 1. The learned Counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has approached this Court without serving any demand notice and the Petition is premature. 2. However, according to the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, demand notice was served on different authorities but none of them even has taken any decision nor have they forwarded the representation of the Petitioner to the State Government. 2 3. In the circumstances aforestated, we do not propose to deal with this Petition, particularly in view of the stand taken by the State Government that they would treat the present Writ Petition as representation and the competent authority would look into the matter and pass appropriate orders. 4. Writ Petition is disposed of. Respondents shall abide by their Statement and act expeditiously. CHIEF JUSTICE V.M. KANADE, J.