← Library
Bombay High CourtCAW/2342/2016disposed off

Sukumar Dadu Awale v. The Jt.Director (Higher Education) And ORS.

2017-08-02Hon'Ble Shri Justice R. I. Chagla,Hon'Ble Shri Justice B.R. Gavai2 pages

rsk 1 929-CAW-1282-16.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1282 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5305 OF 2002 Mongale Raosaheb Ganapati ..Applicant/Petitioner Vs.

The Jt. Director (Higher Education) and Ors.

..Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1283 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5314 OF 2002 Powar Sugandha Bhairu ..Petitioner Vs.

The Jt. Director (Higher Education) and Ors.

..Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2342 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5308 OF 2002 Sukumar Dadu Awale ..Petitioner Vs.

The Jt. Director (Higher Education) and Ors.

..Respondents Ms.Prachi Khandge i/b M. P. Vashi Associates for the Applicants in the Civil Applications.

Mr. A.I. Patel, A.G.P for the Respondent Nos.1 and 5 in the Civil Applications. Mr. Prashant Bhavake for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI AND RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, JJ.

DATE: 2nd AUGUST 2017 P.C. :

.

By way of present applications, the applicants have prayed for modification of the consent minutes of the order dated 24/10/2002 and for

rsk 2 929-CAW-1282-16.doc filing modified consent terms of the order in terms of schedule which is annexed to the Civil Application at Exh.H.

2.

Learned counsel for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3 does not have any objection for the relief as prayed for.

3.

We therefore allow the Civil Applications in terms of prayer clause (a). However, we clarify that the consent terms would be binding only on the Applicants and the Respondent Nos.2 and 3. 4.

Civil Applications are accordingly disposed of. (RIYAZ I. CHAGLA, J.) (B. R. GAVAI, J.)