909 cp 332-20 . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 909 CONT. PETITION NO. 332 OF 2020 IN WP/9184/2018 ANIL AMBADAS TANDALE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ... Mr. Yogesh Bolkar h/f Mr. Jadhav Kakasaheb B., Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. A. S. Shinde, AGP for Respondent-State …. CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE & VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ. Date : 19/08/2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to take instructions, but as per the order under contempt, the respondent- authority was to issue a fresh advertisement inviting applications for the post of Kotwal for village Ghogargaon Sajja. Learned AGP, by pointing out the affidavit in reply, submits that respondent No.2 had already initiated the process for appointment of Kotwal for village Ghogargaon. The communication dated 23/10/2020 is also annexed with the affidavit in reply to that effect. As such, by the passage of time, VS Maind/ Page|1 2026:BHC-AUG:37436-DB 909 cp 332-20 . the order under contempt appears to have been complied with. In view of the same, the petition stands disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to agitate the issue if the process of appointment of Kotwal has not been completed. [VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV] [SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE] JUDGE JUDGE VS Maind/ Page|2