Bombay High CourtWP/2123/2016dispossed offdismiss for default

Swami Vivekananda Education Society Thr. President Yuvraj Manohar Dhanorkr And Others v. Rashtrabhasha Prachar Samiti Gyan Mandal, Wardha Thr. Registrar And Another

2016-04-26Hon'Ble Smt. Justice V.A. Naik,Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.M. Deshpande1 pages

1/1 wp2123.16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 2123 OF 2016 Swami Vivekananda Education Society, thr. its President Yuvraj Manohar Dhanorkar and others -vsRashtrabhasha Prachar Samiti Gyan Mandal, Wardh, thr.its Registrar and another ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.

or directions and Registrar's orders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mr. F.T.Mirza, counsel for the petitioners.

Mr. D.Y.Kumbhare, counsel for the respondents. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & V.M.DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : 26.04.2016.

The only prayer made by the petitioners in the instant petition is for a direction to the respondent-Rashtrabhasha Prachar Samiti Gyan Mandal, Wardha to conduct the examination of students admitted with the petitioner Nos.2, 3 and 4-Institutions. Shri Kumbhare, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2, states by referring to the affidavit-in-reply that the respondents are ready to conduct the examination of the eligible students, if the petitioners pay the examination and the registration fees.

Shri Mirza, the learned counsel for the petitioners, states that the grievance of the petitioners stands redressed, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 on the basis of the affidavit-in-reply. It is stated that the examination and the registration fees would be paid to the respondents within a period of ten days.

By accepting the statements made on behalf of the parties, which would be binding on them, we dispose of the writ petition with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE KHUNTE