Bombay High CourtWP/1579/2015dispossed offdismiss for default

Mrs. Sheela W/O Dhanraj Tidke And Another v. The District Social Welfare Officer, Z.P. Nagpur

2015-10-12Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.A. Naik,Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.I.S. Cheema2 pages

1210wp1579.15.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.1579/2015 Mrs. Sheela w/o Dhanraj Tidke and another ...Versus...

The District Social Welfare Officer, Zilla Parishad, Civil Lines, Nagpur Intervenor : Ashok Shriram Dandekar - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ms K.R. Satpute, Advocate for petitioners Shri N.S. Khubalkar, AGP for respondent - State CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.I.S. CHEEMA, JJ.

DATE : 12.10.2015 Heard.

It is informed to this Court by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that in the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent no.1 it is stated that the last part of the impugned order dated 18.3.2015 is withdrawn and cancelled and a notice is issued to the petitioner, asking the petitioner no.1 to show cause as to why the administrative approval granted to the temporary appointment of the petitioner no.1 should not be cancelled. It is stated that in view of the statements in the additional affidavit, the grievance of the petitioners would not survive at this stage. It is stated that if an adverse action is taken against the petitioner no.1 in the proceedings initiated in pursuance of a fresh showcause-notice, the petitioners would file appropriate proceedings.

1210wp1579.15.odt In view of the statement made on behalf of the respondent no.1 in the additional affidavit-in-reply and the statement made by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, we dispose of the writ petition with no order as to costs. The points raised in the petition are, however, kept open.

JUDGE JUDGE Wadkar