Suresh Manikrao Bharsakle v. Zilla Parishad Amraoti, Thr. C.E.O. Amravati.

17.04.cao.1988.16

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (o) NO.1988/2016 IN MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION (st)NO.19617/2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO.122/2005 (Suresh s/o Manikrao Bharsakle vs. Zilla Parishad, Amravati ) ...........................

............................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders .............................................................................................................................................. Mrs. Charlewar, Advocate for the applicant/ petitioner C O R A M : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

D A T E D : 17th April, 2017.

Heard. Perused the contents of the Application. It would not be necessary to issue notice to the respondent as the respondent was not represented in the Court when the Writ Petition was dismissed.

For the reasons stated in the Application, the delay in filing the restoration Application is condoned.

The Civil Application is allowed and disposed of. M.C.A. (St) NO.19617/2016 Heard.

It would not be necessary to issue notice to the respondent on this Civil Application as the Writ petition was dismissed when the respondent was not represented in the Court.

For the reasons stated in the Application, the Writ Petition is restored to file subject to payment of costs of Rs.500/-(rupees five hundred) to the Vidarbha Lady Lawyers' Association, Nagpur, within one week. Miscellaneous

17.04.cao.1988.16 Civil Application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and disposed of. If the costs are paid and the Writ Petition is restored to file, issue notice to the respondent for hearing of the Writ Petition, on merits. JUDGE JUDGE sahare