1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5988 OF 2010 Harihar Padmakar Patil, age 49 years, occ. General Secretary, Bharatiya Karmachari Mahasangh, 96/324+327, Dharangaon, Tq. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon ...Petitioner VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32, 2 The District Collector, Jalgaon District, Jalgaon, 3 The Municipal Council, Dharangaon, through its Chief Officer; 4 The Director, Municipal Administration, Maharashtra State, Mumbai ...Respondents W I T H 2 WRIT PETITION NO. 5989 OF 2010 Harihar Padmakar Patil, age 49 years, occ. General Secretary, Bharatiya Karmachari Mahasangh, 96/324+327, Dharangaon, Tq. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon ...Petitioner VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32, 2 The District Collector, Jalgaon District, Jalgaon, 3 The Municipal Council, Dharangaon, through its Chief Officer; 4 The Director, Municipal Administration, Maharashtra State, Mumbai ...Respondents WRIT PETITION NO. 6058 OF 2010 Harihar Padmakar Patil, age 49 years, occ. General Secretary, Bharatiya Karmachari Mahasangh, 96/324+327, Dharangaon, Tq. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon ...Petitioner 3 VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32, 2 The District Collector, Jalgaon District, Jalgaon, 3 The Municipal Council, Dharangaon, through its Chief Officer; 4 The Director, Municipal Administration, Maharashtra State, Mumbai ...Respondents AND WRIT PETITION NO. 6094 OF 2010 Harihar Padmakar Patil, age 49 years, occ. General Secretary, Bharatiya Karmachari Mahasangh, 96/324+327, Dharangaon, Tq. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon ...Petitioner VERSUS 1 The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32, 4 2 The District Collector, Jalgaon District, Jalgaon, 3 The Municipal Council, Dharangaon, through its Chief Officer; 4 The Director, Municipal Administration, Maharashtra State, Mumbai ...Respondents ..... Shri K.C.Sant, advocate for the petitioner Smt. A.V.Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1, 2 and 4 Shri U.S.Malte, advocate for respondent no.3 ..... CORAM : R.S.MOHITE AND SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, JJ. DATED : 9 th September, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER R.S.MOHITE, J.) 1 Heard all the parties. 2 Rule. With the consent of the leaned counsel for the parties, Rule is made returnable forthwith and petition is taken up for final hearing. 5 3 It is seen that the main prayer in this group of Writ Petitions is for a direction to respondent no.2 Collector, Jalgaon to decide the applications/complaints filed by the petitioner, bearing the date as contained in prayer 'A' to each petition. 4 Learned A.G.P. who appears for the Collector states that such complaints will be decided within the period of four weeks from today. It is made clear that while deciding the complaints, the Collector may call for such information from respondent no.3 from any other source as he desires. The Collector may decide the pending complaints/applications on their own merits in accordance with law. The decision will be communicated by the Collector to the petitioner. It is further made clear that in view of our direction that the Collector may call for a report or information, we feel that prayer clauses 'B' and 'C' need not be considered. 5 Rule is made absolute in the afore said terms. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) dbm/wp5988.10