OMKAR PRATAP KULKARNI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of parties.

(2.) The petitioners have filed these petitions on 3.3.2015. This court issued notice on 11.3.2015. By a reasoned order however, this court has not granted any interim relief though prayed for but directed the respondents to file affidavit in reply. Respondent nos.1 & 2 by reply dated 24.3.2015 resisted the petitions on every aspect and submitted that no case is made out to disturb and/or interfere with the impugned Notification as the same was prepared after taking into consideration the respective objections so raised within the prescribed period as announced i.e., 9.2.2015 to 12.2.2015. Therefore, the contentions that the Notification which was published by taking objections beyond the period so prescribed is unacceptable.

(3.) Both the counsels for the petitioners in the two petitions raised basic submission revolving around the entertainment of objections so stated to be filed after 12.2.2015. The same are unacceptable in view of the positive averments made in paragraph6 of the affidavit in reply filed by respondent no.1 and respondent no.2, which is as under :