Bombay High Court
CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS AND ANR.versusDEVIDAS GOVIND BHUSARE
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
- Bench
- SANDEEP V MARNE
Holding
The writ petition was dismissed as moot because the respondent had already been appointed, rendering the earlier order no longer operative.
Summary
The petitioners, Conservator of Forests and others, challenged a 2001 order of the Industrial Court concerning Devidas Govind Bhusare. The petitioner’s counsel submitted that the respondent had already been appointed as a Group D Van Majur effective 1 June 2012, as per an order dated 24 May 2013. The court held that, in view of this later appointment, there was nothing left to adjudicate in the writ petition. Consequently, the earlier Industrial Court order was deemed modified, and the writ petition was dismissed as moot. No costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of the respondent's subsequent appointment on the maintainability of the writ petition challenging the earlier Industrial Court order?
Subjects
- writ petition
- appointment
- industrial court
- mootness
- administrative law
Judgment
Vaishnavi 24-WP-4314-2002
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 4314 OF 2002
Conservator Of Forests and Anr. ...Petitioners
V/s.
Devidas Govind Bhusare ...Respondent
________________
Mrs. Vaishali S. Nimbalkar, AGP for Petitioner-State.
________________
CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED: 17 July 2026
P.C.:
1) The Petitioner has 9led the present Petition challenging the
judgment and order dated 11 December 2001 passed in complaint (ULP)
No. 411 of 1999.
2) Ms. Nimbalkar, the learned AGP has placed on record copy of
order dated 24 May 2013, by which the Respondent is already granted
appointment in Group D category as a Van Majur with effect from 1 June
2012. In that view of the matter, nothing survives to be adjudicated in
the present Petition. The impugned order passed by the Industrial Court
accordingly stands modi9ed in view of order dated 24 May 2013.
3) The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. Rule is made
absolute. There shall be no order as to costs.
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
Page No.1 of 1
17 July 2026
Checking your session…