Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2018 DAILYLAW 3643 (BOM)

YOGESH SHIVAJI GOSAVI v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

WP/5559/2018 · 2026-08-31

body2018

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

30 WP NO. 5559 OF 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5559 OF 2018 Yogesh Shivaji Gosavi VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others … WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5561 OF 2018 Vaishali Subhashrao Gaikwad VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others … WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5560 OF 2018 Satish Tukaram Gangarde VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others … WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10082 OF 2018 IN WP/5559/2018 Laxman Ankush Sonawalkar VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others … WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5562 OF 2018 Madhav Prabhakar Gosavi VERSUS State Of Maharashtra And Others … WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5564 OF 2018 Smt Jyoti Padmakar Ghawate VERSUS Jhs/ 1/3 2026:BHC-AUG:39993-DB 30 WP NO. 5559 OF 2018 State Of Maharashtra And Others … WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5563 OF 2018 Smt Nirmala Rangnath Dhere VERSUS State Of Maharashtra And Others … WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5825 OF 2018 Manisha Abhiman Kharade VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others … WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5830 OF 2018 Sonali Ashok Dokhe @ Sonali Ajit Gadekar And Another VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others … • Mr. Arvind G. Ambetkar, Advocate for the Petitioners in Writ Petition Nos. 5559 of 2018, 5560 of 2018, 5561 of 2018, 5562 of 2018, 5563 of 2018, 5564 of 2018, 5825 of 2018 and 5830 of 2018. • Mr. Ajay T. Kanawade, Advocate for the Applicant in Civil Application No. 10082 of 2018 in Writ Petition No. 5559 of 2018. • Mr. R. S. Wani, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 – State. • Mr. Shivaji T. Shelke, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 in the respective Writ Petitions. … CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATE : 31st AUGUST, 2026 Jhs/ 2/3 30 WP NO. 5559 OF 2018 PER COURT : 1. All these petitions concern the transfers of the petitioners, who are Zilla Parishad teachers. The petitioners challenge their respective transfers effected in the year 2018. It is informed that some of the transfers have already been effected. Considering the lapse of about eight years, this Court does not find it appropriate to entertain the challenge to the transfers at this stage. 2. In view of the above, no case is made out for entertaining these petitions. Hence, the Writ Petitions stand disposed of. 3. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. [JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [KISHORE C. SANT, J.] Jhs/ 3/3