1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6523 OF 2007 Smt. Shantabai w/o. Hanuman Sapte, R/o-Kudali, Taluka-Degloor, District-Nanded. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, and others. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Smt.M.A. Kulkarni Advocate for Petitioner. Smt.Y.M. Kshirsagar, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1. Shri.P.P. More Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 15TH JULY, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2 2. The learned counsel appearing for Zilla Parishad today produced original file before us and pointed out communication dated 23rd April, 1997 made by office of Lok-Ayukta to Hanuman Deorao Sapte, deceased husband of the Petitioner. In the view of the Lok-Ayukta, in the light of the provisions of Rule 100(1) and 101 of Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1982, the husband of the Petitioner was not entitled for compassionate pension. 3. In the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the communication dated 24th July 2007, made by Zilla Parishad to the Petitioner. In the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, it has been stated that the services of the deceased husband of the Petitioner were terminated on 3rd December, 1996. 4. In this view of the matter, no interference at this stage, in exercise of extra 3 ordinary writ jurisdiction, is warranted. The Writ Petition is rejected. 5. If the Petitioner is desirous of filing comprehensive representation to the Authorities, the Petitioner is entitled to do so. [K.K. TATED, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] asb/JULY10/wp6523.07