All Writ Petition (Civil)

Order - Status 5: suresh 908-WP-2265.2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE – CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2265 OF 2014 Sakshi Naresh Nagwani @ Neetu Kanayalal Gursahani .... Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .... Respondents Mr. J.S. Kini i/b Mr. Suresh Dubey for the Petitioner. Ms M.H. Mhatre, APP, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM: V.M. KANADE & P.D. KODE, JJ. DATED: JULY 01, 2014 P.C: Issue notice before admission to the respondents, returnable on 3072014. The learned APP waives service of notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3. In the meantime, there shall be adinterim relief in terms of prayer clause (b). (P.D. KODE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2265 OF 2014 Sakshi N. Nagwani ..Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Suresh Dubey for the Petitioner. Mr. Sunedh Kale a/w. Ms. K.H.Rajani for the respondent no.3. Mr. K.V.Saste, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI,JJ. DATED : JANUARY 12, 2015. P.C. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the provisions of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing the MECR No.3 of 2013 registered at Rabale Police Station, in pursuance of the order under Sec.156(3) issued by the learned Magistrate in OA No.256 of 2013. The petitioner is the wife of the respondent no.3, due to the differences between the parties, respondent no.3 has filed criminal case against the petitioner for offence punishable under Section 420, 384, 406, 504, 506, 407 r/w. 34 of IPC and under Section 67A of the Information Technology Act. The learned Judge passed an order under Section 156(3) and thereafter MECR in question is registered against the petitioner. The differences and disputes between the parties were thereafter settled by intervention of mediator and accordingly consent terms were entered into between the parties in Criminal Application No. 743 of 2014. In para 14 and para 22 of the said consent terms both the parties agreed to withdraw the allegations made against each other. The respondent no.3 has also given no objection for quashing of the said MECR. The respondent no.3 also has filed an affidavit dated 12.1.2015. In para 3 he has given no objection for quashing and setting aside the said MECR in pursuance of the consent terms dated 23.12.2014. The respondent no.3 is personally present in the court. He states that he has gone through the consent terms and affidavit and states that he has no objection for quashing the said MECR. He further states that he is giving no objection without any influence or coercion from anybody. In the above facts and circumstances, and in the light of the decision in the case of in B. S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana reported [AIR 2003 SC 1386] wherein it is held that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code.". It can, thus, be seen that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. From the perusal of complaint, it transpires that the allegations are totally personal in nature. There is no element of public law involved in the crime. In these circumstances, and especially, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, [(2008) 4 SCC 582] , we find that no purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending except burdening the Criminal Courts which are already overburdened. In the light of the principles laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid decision as well as in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab [2014 AIR SCW 2065] we are of the considered view that there is no impediment in quashing the criminal proceedings. Accordingly, petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) (RANJIT MORE, J.)

Order - Status 11: SSK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2265 OF 2014 Sakshi Naresh Nagwani ….Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra and ors. ….Respondents None for the petitioner. Ms. K. H. Rajani, advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM : RANJIT MORE & ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. DATED : 5th MARCH, 2015. P.C.: The matter is placed on board for speaking to the minutes of order dated 12th January, 2015. It is submitted that certain inadvertent mistakes have crept in the said order. The said mistakes are rectified and are, accordingly, read and substituted as under : In paragraph 1, instead of "OA No.256 of 2013", it be read and substituted as "OMA No.658 of 2013". In paragraph 2, line 4, "Section 407" be read and substituted "Section 497". In cause-title as well as in paragraphs 2 and 4, the words "respondent No.3", be read and substituted as "respondent No.4". The order dated 12th January, 2015, stands corrected accordingly. (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) (RANJIT MORE, J.) Shubhada S Kadam 1/1

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. R. BORKAR J DATE : 13th July, 2023 P.C. : S. O. to 14/07/2023 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala and Associates …Petitioner Versus Nirmal Township "A" Co-operative Housing Society Limited and anr. …Respondents …...... Mr. Girish Godbole a/w Ms. Deepashikha Godbole a/w Kaushtubh Thipsay for the Petitioner. Mr. Shrikant D. Patil for the Respondents. …...... CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 14 JULY 2023 P.C. :- List on 4 August 2023. The parties shall remain present on the next date. ( N.R. BORKAR, J. )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT Mr. Deepashikha Godbole for Petitioner Mr. Shrikant Dinkar Patil for Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. R. BORKAR J DATE : 4th August, 2023 P.C. : By consent S. O. to 25/08/2023 ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR J DATE : 22nd August, 2023 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 13/09/2023. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B.K. Jhala and Associates .....Petitioner Vs. Nirmal Township A Cooperative Housing Society Ltd and Anr .....Respondents Mr. Girish Godbole, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Kaustubh Thipsay i/b. Ms. Deepshikha Godbole, for the Petitioner. Mr. Shrikant Dinkar Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No.1. Mr Sanjay D. Rayrikar, AGP for Respondent No.2. CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : rd 23 OCTOBER 2023 P.C. Learned counsels appearing for the parties state that the parties are agreeable to explore the possibility of settlement, and they need some time. Mr. Godbole, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner on instructions of the partner of the petitioner, Mr. Kamlesh Jhala, who is present in the court, states that he is willing to discuss and sort out the differences with respect to the area to be transferred to the society. varsha The Chairman of the Society, Mr Borkar Jalinder Namdeo is also present in the Court. He agrees that the society's office bearers shall attend the meeting in the petitioner's office on 29th October 2023. On request of both parties, stand over to 2nd November 2023. [GAURI GODSE, J.]

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala and Associates … Petitioner Vs. Nirmal Township A Co-operative … Respondents Housing Society Ltd. and Another Mr. Girish S. Godbole i/b. Mr. Kaustubh Thipsay and Mr. Deepshikha Godbole for the Petitioner. Mr. Kishore Patil i/b. Mr. Shrikant D. Patil and Mr. Arjun S.Pawar for Respondent No. 1. Ms. M. P. Thakur, AGP for the State. CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : 5 th FEBRUARY 2024 P.C. Learned counsel for respondent no. 1 seeks some more time as the parties are still exploring possibility of settlement. Stand over to 21st February 2024. To be listed under the caption "For settlement". [GAURI GODSE, J.] RAJESHWARI RAMESH PILLAI Digitally signed by RAJESHWARI RAMESH PILLAI Date: 2024.02.06 14:35:43 +0530

Order - Status 16: 8-wp-8512-2023.doc varsha IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B.K. Jhala and Associates … Petitioner vs. Nirmal Township A Cooperative Housing Society Ltd and Anr … Respondents Mr. Kaustubh Thipsay i/b. Ms. Deepashikha Godbole, for Petitioner. Mr. Arjun S. Pawar for Respondent no.1. Mrs. M.P. Thakur, AGP for the State. CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATED : 21 st FEBRUARY, 2024 P.C. :- Learned counsel for the respective parties state that parties are still exploring the possibility of settlement and according to them dispute is likely to be settled amicably. Hence, they request for some more time. Stand over to 8th March 2024. To be listed under the caption for 'Settlement'. (GAURI GODSE, J.)

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala and Associates … Petitioner Vs. Nirmal Township A Co-operative … Respondents Housing Society Ltd. and Another Mr. Kaustubh Thipsay i/b. Mr. Deepshikha Godbole for the Petitioner. Mr. Shrikant D. Patil for Respondent No. 1. Ms. M. S. Bane, AGP for the State. CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : 8 th MARCH 2024 P.C. Learned counsels for the respective parties submits that talks for amicable settlement are still going on. Hence, they request for some more time. At their request stand over to 15th March 2024. To be listed under the caption "For Settlement".

Order - Status 20: 21.8512.23 wp.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala and Associates .....Petitioner Vs. Nirmal Township A Co Operative .....Respondents Housing Society Ltd and Anr Mr. Kaustubh Thipsay i/b Deepashika Godbole for the petitioner Mr. Shrikant D. Patil for respondent Smt. M. S. Bane, AGP for the State CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : 15th MARCH 2024 P.C. Learned counsel submits that parties have exchanged the offers for settlement and they need some more time for exploring the possibility of settlement. Stand over to 1st April 2023. To be listed under the caption "For Settlement". [GAURI GODSE, J.]

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala and Associates … Petitioner Vs. Nirmal Township A Co-operative … Respondents Housing Society Ltd. and Another Mr. Kaustubh Thipsay i/b. Mr. Deepshikha Godbole for the Petitioner. Mr. Shrikant D. Patil for Respondent No. 1. Ms. R. S. Pawar, AGP for the State. CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : 1 st APRIL 2024 P.C. Learned counsels for the respective parties submit that the parties are unable to settle the dispute amicably. They make a request to fix the petition for hearing on admission. Stand over to 29th April 2024. [GAURI GODSE, J.] rrpillai

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE: 29th APRIL 2024 P.C. :- Iresh On account of paucity of time, following matters on Daily Board stand adjourned as follows : Sr. Nos. Next Date 61 to 70 18th June 2024 71 to 80 19th June 2024 81 to 90 21st June 2024 91 to 100 24th June 2024 101 to 110 25th June 2024 111 to 116 26th June 2024 118 to 120 26th June 2024 121 to 126 28th June 2024 127 30th April 2024 128 to 130 28th June 131 to 133 1st July 2024 134 3rd May 2024 135 to 140 1st July 2024 141 to 148 2nd July 2024 If in any of the above matters, ad-interim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates. If ad-interim relief or interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected. (GAURI GODSE, J.) 1/1

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT Ms. Deepashikha Godbole for Petitioner Ms. R. S. Pawar, AGP for State CORAM : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH J DATE : 24th July, 2024 P.C. : At the request of learned counsel for the Petitioner , stand over to 29/07/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 28: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates. ...Petitioner. Versus Nirmal Township A CHS Ltd and Another. ...Respondents. —————— Mr. Girish S. Godbole, Senior Advocate i/b Mr. Kaustabh Thipsay and Ms. Deepashikha Godbole for the Petitioner. Mr. Shrikant D. Patil for the Respondent No.1. Mr. R. S. Pawar, AGP for the Respondent-State. —————— Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. Date : July 29, 2024. P. C. : 1. Leave to correct pagination. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1 seeks time to file reply. Let the reply be filed on or before 7th August 2024. Rejoinder, if any, to be filed on or before 12th August 2024. List on 13th August 2024 . It is made clear that time permitting, the petition will be heard finally at the admission stage. [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]

Order - Status 30: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH J DATE : 13th August, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 06/09/2024. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 32: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT Mr. Ajinkya Taskar i/b Mr. Shrikant Patil for Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH J DATE : 6th September, 2024 P.C. : S. O. to 11/10/2024 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 34: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION COMMON ORDER Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. Date : 11th October, 2024. P. C. : TALLE SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO Digitally signed by TALLE SHUBHAM ASHOKRAO Date: 2024.10.15 09:56:54 On account of paucity of time, following matters on Daily Board dated 11th October 2024, stand adjourned as follows: - Serial. Nos. Next Date Sr. 32 To 51 rd December, 2024 (except Sr. 45) 3 Sr. 52 To 71 th December, 2024 (except Sr. 61) 4 Sr. 72 To 100 th December, 2024 (except Sr. 97) 6 Sr. 101 To 120 17th December, 2024 Sr. 121 To 140 18th December, 2024 Sr. 141 To 160 (except Sr. 155) 20th December, 2024 Sr. 161 To 180 rd January, 2025 (except Sr. 170) 3 Sr. 181 To 205 th January, 2025 (except Sr. 183,187,200) 6 If in any of the above matters, ad-interim relief or interim relief is operative till today, the same will continue to operate till the respective next dates. If ad-interim relief or interim relief is not granted for a limited period, the said orders will remain unaffected. [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]

Order - Status 36: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH J DATE : 6th December, 2024 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 25/04/2025. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 37: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR J DATE : 5th March, 2025 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, stand over to 15/04/2025. Interim order, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 39: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT Mr. Girish Godbole, Sr. Adv. A/W Mr. Kaustubh Thipsay i/by Ms. Deepashikha Godbole for Petitioner. Mr. Shrikant Dinkar Patil for Respondent No. 1. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR J DATE : 15th April, 2025 P.C. : S. O. to 21/04/2025 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 41: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8512 OF 2023 M/s. B. K. Jhala And Associates ....PETITIONER V/S Nirmal Township A Co Operative Housing Society Ltd. And Anr ....RESPONDENT Adv. Deepashikha Godbole for Petitioner. Mr. Kishor Patil i/by Mr. Shrikant Dinkar Patil for Respondent No. 1. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR J DATE : 21st April, 2025 P.C. : S. O. to 23/04/2025 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 44: AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8512 OF 2023 B.K. Jhala & Associates … Petitioner V/s. Nirmal Township "A" Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. & Anr. … Respondents Mr. Girish S. Godbole, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kaustubh Thipsay i/by Ms. Deepshikha Godbole for the petitioner. Mr. Kishor Patil i/by Mr. Shrikant D. Patil for respondent No.1. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : APRIL 23, 2025 P.C.: Mr. Godbole, learned Senior Advocate, on instructions from Mr. Kamlesh Jhala, partner of the petitioner, states that the petitioner be permitted to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file civil suit. The writ petition stands disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is made that this Court has not adjudicated petitioner's grievance on merits, and it shall be open for the petitioner to raise all contentions before the Civil Court by way of civil suit. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 7: ttm IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6006 OF 2011 The Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nasik .. Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra and Anr. .. Respondents Mr.Mahesh Agawekar i/b Ms.Anamik Malhotra for the petitioner Mr.P.G.Sawant 'B' Panel for respondent no.1 Mr.J.D.Khairnar for respondent no.2 CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATE: 1st AUGUST, 2011 PC: Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, matter is taken for final hearing and disposed of at the stage of admission itself. By this petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner original respondent challenges the order dt. 6.5.2011 passed by learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik, below Ex.U2 filed by respondent no.2 for interim relief to stay the operation and implementation of transfer order dt. 16.12.2010 issued by the petitioner, Zilla Parishad, Nasik. Respondent no.2 is working with the petitioner, Zilla Parishad, Nasik as Desk Officer. Initially, on account of misconduct he was suspended by order dt.1.9.2010. Thereafter, respondent no.2 made representation to the petitioner. Considering respondent no.2's representation, petitioner issued the order dt. 15.12.2010 reinstating respondent no.2 in his original post subject to departmental enquiry. Thereafter, on the next date, petitioner issued transfer order dt.16.12.2010 transferring respondent no.2 on said post to Panchayat Samiti, Surgana. Respondent no.2 joined their as Desk Officer and worked for 4/5 months. Thereafter, respondent no.2 filed a complaint (ULP) No.108 of 2011 before the Industrial Court under Items 3 and 9 of Schedule IV of MRTU and PULP Act, 1971 along with application for interim relief under section 30(2). In the said complaint, respondent no.2 contended that he is suffering 40% disability and same is declared by the Medical Board as per certificate dt.3.3.2005. Thereafter, on the basis of Government Resolution dt.15.04.2004 and 15.12.2004, he is entitled to be posted near his home town i.e. at Nasik. The said interim application was allowed by leaned Member, Industrial Court by impugned order dt.6.5.2011 and directed petitioner, Zilla Parishad, Nasik to allow respondent no.2 to work at Nasik or near Nasik as per Government Resolution No.15.04.2004 and 15.12.2004. Hence, the present petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Member of Industrial Court erred in coming to the conclusion that respondent no.2 by way of interim relief is entitled to stay the operation and implementation of the transfer order dt. 16.12.2010. He further submits that initially respondent no.2 was suspended on 1.9.2010 and thereafter, considering his applications, they reinstated him on his original post by order dt.15.12.2010 subject to departmental enquiry. He further submits that departmental enquiry is going on against respondent no.2. He further submits that initially respondent no.2 joined the services as per transfer order dt.16.12.2010 at Panchayat Samiti, Surgana without complaining about his disability and thereafter, filed complaint (ULP) No.108 of 2011. He submits that the main complaint is pending for hearing and final disposal. The Industrial Court by interim relief allowed indirectly prayer in the main complaint itself. Therefore, impugned order passed by learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik, dt.6.5.11 is liable to be set aside. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent no.2 vehemently opposed the present petition. He submits that as per Government Resolution dt.15.04.2004 and 15.12.2004 respondent no.2 is entitled to the posting near his home town. He submits that respondent no.2 has his house at Nasik. Since beginning he has stayed there. He submits that the Village Surgana is about 50 to 60 kms from Nasik and therefore, it is very difficult for him to attend his duty there. He submits that after joining at Surgana he noticed that due to 40% disability he is facing several difficulties and therefore, he preferred the present complaint. I have gone through the G.R. dt.15.4.04 and 15.12.04. I have also gone through the reinstatement letter dt.15.12.2010 and transfer order dt.16.12.2010. It is to be noted that initially respondent no.2 was suspended in the year 2010. On his request, petitioner reinstated him on 15.10.10 subject to departmental enquiry. Not only that his main complaint challenging the transfer order dt.15.12.2010 is pending. By interim relief learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik indirectly allowed the respondent no.2's main complaint itself. Considering all these facts, I am of the opinion that the learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik erred in staying operation and implementation of the Tribunal's order dt.16.12.2010 directing petitioner Zilla Parishad, Nasik to allow respondent no.2 to work at Nasik or near Nasik as per G.R. dt.15.4.2010 and 15.12.2010. The learned counsel for the petitioner makes a statement that at present, no post is available at Nasik or near Nasik. Considering these facts, the impugned order passed by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Nasik below Exh.U2 in complaint ULP 108 o 2010 is set aside. 10.Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, hearing of complaint (ULP) No. 108 of 2011 is expedited. 11.Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. (K.K.TATED,J.)

Order - Status 6: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5139 OF 2005 --------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office : Memoranda of Coram, : appearances, Court's : Court's or Judge's Orders orders or directions : & Registrar's orders. : . --------------------------------------------------------- Mr. P.S. Dani for the petitioners. None for the respondent. CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J. DATED: 24TH AUGUST, 2005. P.C. :- Await service. Office to place this matter on board on 31/8/2005. Till 1/9/2005, there will be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b) of the petition. (SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.)

Order - Status 9: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5139 OF 2005 --------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office : Memoranda of Coram, : appearances, Court's : Court's or Judge's Orders orders or directions : & Registrar's orders. : . --------------------------------------------------------- Mr. P.S. Dani for the petitioners. None for the respondent. CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J. DATED: 29TH SEPTEMBER, 2005. P.C. :- Await service. Office to place this matter on board on 20/10/2005. Ad-interim relief granted by this court on 8/8/2005 to continue till then. (SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.)

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.5139 OF 2005 Roha Education and Welfare Association : Petitioner V/s. Shri Neesar Usman Morbekar : Respondent ... Mr.P.S.Dani for the petitioner. Mr.Prakash Mahadik for the respondent. ... CORAM : S.A.BOBDE, J. DATE : JANUARY 29, 2008. P.C . The issue involved in this petition is about the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Roha, whose jurisdiction in respect of matters is less than Rs.1,00,000/-. The learned counsel for the respondent states that the respondent hereby withdraws prayer (1) in Civil Suit no.31 of 2005. The respondent is hereby allowed to withdraw the said prayer. The amendment shall be carried out within a period of four weeks from the next date before the trial Court. In view of the above, Mr.Dani for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the petition. Allowed to withdraw. The trial Court shall decide the suit as expeditiously as possible. S.A. BOBDE, J.

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2745 OF 2019 Radha Venkatesh Shetty … Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and anr. … Respondents Mr. Satyavrat Joshi i/by Mr. Sunil Kamble for the petitioner. Smt. A.S. Pai, APP for the respondent State. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & NITIN R. BORKAR, JJ. DATE : JANUARY 30, 2020 P.C. : Issue notice to respondent returnable on 10/03/2020. Learned APP waives notice for respondent no.1. RPAD/humdast for respondent no. 2. In the meanwhile, petitioner to remove all office objections. If office objections are not removed, petition stall stand dismissed automatically without reference to the court. (NITIN R. BORKAR, J.) (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 2745 OF 2019 Radha Venkatesh Shetty ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. ....RESPONDENT MR. SATYAVRAT JOSHI i/by MR. SUNIL SHIVAJI KAMBLE for Petitioner. MR. A. S. Pai, PP for Respondent/State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATE : 12th August, 2021 P.C. : Wrongly on board. Remove from the Board. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2668 OF 2021 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2745 OF 2019 with INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2669 OF 2021 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2745 OF 2019 with WRIT PETITION NO. 2745 OF 2019 Radha Venkatesh Shetty....Applicant/Petitioner.Versus...Applicant/Petitioner.The State of Maharashtra & Another....Respondents. Mr. Somay Pawar i/b Sunil S. Kamble for the Applicant/Petitioner. Mr. K. V. Saste, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & ANIL S. KILOR, JJ. Date : January 7, 2022. [Video Conferencing Mode] P. C. : Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant/ Petitioner submitted that due to certain bonafide reasons, he was unable to remove office objections within the stipulated period and as the office objections were not removed, the petition stood dismissed. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant submitted that he is desirous of removing all office objections during the course of day. He further submitted that as such the delay occurred in preferring the application for restoration is also for bonafide reasons and the same was not intentional. In view of the submissions of learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant, both the applications are allowed. Delay is condoned. Writ petition is restored to the file. Petition is taken up for hearing. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashment of subject FIR; the petition is filed on 20th May 2019 and post filing of petition, the matter proceeded further in the trial Court; and in the ultimate decision of trial Court by the judgment and order, the Petitioner has been acquitted. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner submitted that as such the grievance of Petitioner, as raised in the present writ petition, no more survives. In view of the above fact-situation, petition is disposed of. [Anil S. Kilor, J.] [Prasanna B. Varale, J.]

Order - Status 4: Chitra Sonawane IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2155 OF 2023 Vijay Kisan Waghmare ] Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ] Respondents. Ms Sahana Manjesh for the petitioner. Ms MH Mhatre,APP for State. CORAM: Nitin W. Sambre & R.N.Laddha, JJ. DATE : 5th July, 2023. Learned APP seeks time so as to enable him to place on record categorization of the petitioner, who is already convicted for an offence punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC, and is ordered to undergo life imprisonment. .... Stand over to 18 th August , 2023 . [R.N.Laddha, J.] [Nitin W. Sambre, J.] Page No. 1 of 1 5 July 2023.

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2155 OF 2023 Vijay Kisan Waghmare ... Petitioner. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents. ……. Ms Sahana Manjesh for the Petitioner. Ms MH Mhatre, APP for State. .…... CORAM: Nitin W. Sambre & R.N.Laddha, JJ. DATE : 18 August, 2023. .... P.C.: Leave to amend. Amendment be carried out within 4 weeks. Stand over to 3 rd October, 2023. [R.N.Laddha, J.] [Nitin W.Sambre, J.] 18 Aug 2023.

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2155 OF 2023 Vijay Kisan Waghmare …..Petitioner Vs. The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. …..Respondents None for the Petitioner. Mrs. M.H. Mhatre APP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE : 3rd OCTOBER, 2023. P.C.:- Learned APP on instructions submitted that, by an Order dated 17th August, 2023 passed by the Competent Authority, the Petitioner has been placed in category 4(b) of 2010 Guidelines. As none appears for the Petitioner, stand over to 25th October, 2023. (SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 2155 OF 2023 Vijay Kisan Waghmare .. Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Ms. Sahana Manjesh, for the Petitioner. Mr. H. J. Dedhia, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND SHYAM C. CHANDAK, JJ. DATE : 25th OCTOBER, 2023. P. C.:- Learned APP seeks time to file reply of Respondent No. 2 to the Petition. At his request, stand over to 14th December, 2023. (SHYAM C. CHANDAK J.) (A. S. GADKARI, J.)

Order - Status 14: MANDIRA MILIND SALGAONKAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2155 OF 2023 … ... Vijay Kisan Waghmare .. Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Ms.Sahana Manjesh for the Petitioner. Mr.J.P.Yagnik, A.P.P. for the State/Respondent. CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE & MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : 30 th JULY, 2024 P.C:- The Petitioner, a convict, undergoing life imprisonment on being convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Omerga, District Osmanabad, for committing the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 307 of IPC, has been categorised by the State Government under 4(b) of the 2010 guidelines. The counsel for the Petitioner raised a grievance about incorrect categorization, as according to her, the offence committed by the Petitioner would be entitled to be categorised in a category, where murder is committed without premeditation in an individual capacity i.e. 4(a) of the guidelines of premature release of prisoners serving life sentence dated 15/03/2010. At this juncture, we must take a note that category 4(b) reads to the following effect :- "4(b) Murder committed with premeditation or a person having criminal history". Category 4(a) has prescribed the period of imprisonment to be undergone as 20 years, whereas category 4(b) prescribe the punishment to be undergone as 22 years. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has placed reliance upon the decision of this Court in the case of Prayagbai wd/o Sakharam Kamble Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. 1 , but on perusal of the said decision, the fact itself would reveal the background in which the incident had occurred, when some altercation took place between Shobha, Sarubai-her mother-in-law and Prayagbai, sisterin-law and this prompted the petitioner Prayagbai to pour kerosene on Shobha and Sarubai setting her on fire. On alarm being raised by Shobha, neighbours came to her rescue. This offence was categorised as without premeditation and we have no difficulty, as regards the conclusion that has been reached by the Division Bench. However, we must take into account the facts of the present case and from perusal of the judgment by the Sessions Court, which is upheld by the High Court, the case of the prosecution is to the effect that Nandabai Waghmare alongwith her deceased brother was sleeping on a cot and at around 12 midnight, the accused reached there and he gave blows with koyta to her brother Sudam on his forehead, above right eye and also to her and injured both of them. Sudam succumbed to the injuries on 26/01/2007 i.e. 7 days after the incident. We made serious attempt to appreciate the argument of the learned counsel, but we remain unpersuaded. The term 'premeditation' specifically indicate a crime planned 1 1999(3) Mh.L.J. 762 in advance and when we ascertained the facts of the case, it is evident from the prosecution case that the accused, who is brother of husband of Nandabai demanded Rs.80/- to her on 20/01/2007, which she paid and after taking meals, they went to sleep. In the mid-night, the accused reached there being armed with koyta and mounted the assault. The prosecution witnesses deposed to that effect and PW 10, who examined Sudam, had noticed two injuries on him. He was, thereafter, referred to Civil Hospital, Solapur for further treatment and the postmortem report refers to heamatoma present under scalp in right frontal and temporo parital region, multiple fracture of interior and middle cranial forsa on right side. It also record presence of subdural haematoma along the tentorium cerebelli and posterior falx. In the wake of the above, we are not satisfied with the submission advanced on behalf of the Petitioner, that he ought to have been categorised under 4(a) of the guidelines and, according to us, the State Government in the wake of the decision of the Additional Sessions Judge, which is upheld by this Court, that the crime was committed with premeditation, has rightly categorised him in category 4(b). Upholding the said order, the Writ Petition is dismissed. (MANJUSHA DESHPANDE,J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.) M.M.Salgaonkar

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 509 OF 2005 Rajaram Shankar More Petitioner. Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. Respondents. Dr. V. K. Chaudhary for the Petitioner. Mrs. J. S. Pawar, Addl.G.P. for the State. CORAM : DALVEER BHANDARI, C. J. & S. A. BOBDE, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 17, 2005. P.C. : Learned Counsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw this petition with liberty to file a fresh petition. This petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed. Sd/ CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/ S. A. BOBDE, J.

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRTIT PETITION NO.237 OF 2005 Shri...Petitioner. Jayant Vithal Abhyankar V/s Mr. Lulu Domnic Fernandes and...Respondents. Ors. --- Mr. Sunil R. More for the petitioner. Mr. D.P. Adsule, APP for the State. --- CORAM: V.M. KANADE, J. DATE : 1st March, 2005 P.C. Issue notice before admission. Returnable within four weeks. In the meantime, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (c). Hamdust permitted. V.M. KANADE, J.

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 237 OF 2005. Jayant V. Abhyankar ....Petitioner Versus Lulu D. Fernandes and Ors. ...Respondents Mr. S.S. Mangaonkar for the petitioner. Ms. Nipa Singh, instructed by M/s. Mahesh Menon & Co., for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR, J. DATE: DECEMBER 13, 2005 . P.C. Due to paucity of time, it is not possible to take up this matter today. Stand over to 13 th February, 2006. Ad-interim order granted , if any, to continue till the next date of hearing. (A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.)

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 237 OF 2005 Jayant Vithal Abhyankar ….Petitioner. Vs. Lulu Domnic Fernandes & Ors. ….Respondents. None for the Petitioner. Mr. A.R. Patil APP, for the RespondentState. CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 17th SEPTEMBER, 2018. P.C.: None for the Petitioner. 2 Dismissed for nonprosecution. (A.S. GADKARI, J.) S S Mashalkar Digitally signed by S S Mashalkar Date: 2018.09.18 17:01:12 +0530

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 746 OF 2018 Harichandra Narayan Thakare ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra, Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 747 OF 2018 Kachan Ramesh Dhukate And Anr. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra, Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 748 OF 2018 Mrs. Ranjeeta Praful Patil And Anr. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 761 OF 2018 Miss Patil Smita Sarjerao And Anr. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra, Through Secretary And Anr. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 758 OF 2018 Hitaishi Hitendra Patil And Anr. Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra, Through The Respondent Secretary And Anr. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 760 OF 2018 Ms. Churi Deepali Bhalchandra And Anr. Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Respondent Secretary And Ors. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 757 OF 2018 Shri. Dineash Kamlakar Naik And Anr Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Respondent Secretary, And Ors. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & B.P. COLABAWALLA, JJ DATE : 31st January, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time, the matters are adjourned. Ad-interim relief, if any, to continue till then. Stand over to 28/03/2018. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 746 OF 2018 Harichandra Narayan Thakare ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra, Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 747 OF 2018 Kachan Ramesh Dhukate And Anr. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra, Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 748 OF 2018 Mrs. Ranjeeta Praful Patil And Anr. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 761 OF 2018 Miss Patil Smita Sarjerao And Anr. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra, Through Secretary And Anr. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 758 OF 2018 Hitaishi Hitendra Patil And Anr. Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra, Through The Respondent Secretary And Anr. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 760 OF 2018 Ms. Churi Deepali Bhalchandra And Anr. Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Respondent Secretary And Ors. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 757 OF 2018 Shri. Dineash Kamlakar Naik And Anr Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Respondent Secretary, And Ors. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & SMT. BHARATI HARISH DANGRE, JJ DATE : 28th February, 2018 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned. Stand over to 25/04/2018. Ad-interim relief, if any, to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 11551 OF 2012 Dr. Ansari @ Abdulla Mohammad } Petitioners versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. } Respondents WITH CONNECTED MATTERS AT SR. NOS. 927 TO 1205 ON TODAY'S BOARD AND WRIT PETITION NOS. 13134/2017, 112/2018, 113/2018, 4771/2018, 4772/2018, 4773/2018, 746/2018, 747/2018, 748/2018, 758/2018, 760/2018, 757/2018, 2069/2018, 13322/2017, 13323/2017, 12801/2017, 13325/2017, 14071/2017, 14070/2017, 14066/2017 Mr.N.V.Bandiwadekar for the petitioners. Ms. S. D. Vyas-'B' Panel Counsel with Mr.B. V. Samant-AGP, Mr. V. M. Mali-AGP and Mr. S. B. Kalel-AGP for State. CORAM :- S. C. DHARMADHIKARI & SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, JJ. DATE :- AUGUST 1, 2018 P.C. :- It is stated by the counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned AGP that out of the matters listed today, a common list of cases referred by the clause (a), namely, "applications seeking approval forwarded by the Management are pending or unattended without any orders" and under the category (d), namely, "the proposals forwarded by the Managements have not been accepted simply because of the ban imposed by GR dated 2nd Jayant Vishwanath Salunke Digitally signed by Jayant Vishwanath Salunke Date: 2018.08.09 16:06:56 +0530 May, 2012", would be provided and the following writ petitions, some of which are not on board are taken on board, can be treated as disposed of in terms of the order passed on 19th July, 2018 in Civil Writ Petition No.10518 of 2016:- WRIT PETITION NOS. 13134/2017, 112/2018, 113/2018, 4771/2018, 4772/2018, 4773/2018746/2018, 747/2018, 748/2018, 758/2018, 760/2018, 757/2018, 2069/2018, 13322/2017, 13323/2017, 12801/2017, 13325/2017, 14071/2017, 14070/2017, 14066/2017 On submission of such common list and signed by both, the petitioners' advocate and the learned AGP, each of these writ petitions as enlisted would stand disposed of. In addition, the following correction shall be made in the order passed on 19th July, 2018 in Writ Petition No. 10518 of 2016:- "In para 4, the date "10th June, 2017 is erroneously mentioned. It shall be read as 10th July, 2017." The time of three months for taking a decision in terms of order passed on 19th July, 2018 in Writ Petition No. 10518 of 2016 shall commence from today. We would expect the competent authority, namely, the Education Officer not to act on the basis that the posts held by the petitioners are vacant and therefore, surplus teachers can be absorbed and should be absorbed by the Management. All such actions initiated shall not be given effect to for a period of four months from today. This direction is issued on the basis of the apprehension expressed by the petitioners' counsel appearing in Writ Petition Nos. 1771 of 2018 and 1779 of 2018 appearing at serial number 1142 on today's board. Let the matters covered by the other category [clause (b)] of para 1 of the order dated 19th July, 2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 10518 of 2016 be listed, at the requested of the counsel, on 30th August, 2018. (SMT. BHARATI H. DANGRE, J.) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4736 OF 2004 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. ... ... .... ... Petitioner. Versus Manny C. D'Mello & Ors. ... ... Respondents. Mr. M. D. Sidia with Ms. D. S. Retiwala i/by Rustamji & Ginwala for the Petitioner. Mr. Hitesh Jain for Respondent No.1. CORAM : S. A. BOBDE, J. DATED : 29TH APRIL, 2005. P.C.: Rule. Having regard to the dealership agreement dated 12th March, 1999 between the petitioner and the respondent No.1, it is clear that the respondent No.1 was inducted into the premises as dealer vide clause 2 for the purposes mentioned therein. The Petitioner itself is a Lessee of the property leased out to it by the Natu family. Clearly, this is a dispute arising out of the dealership agreement vide clause 2 thereof and is within the scope of Clause 66 which is the arbitration clause. Having regard to the admitted position that the arbitration clause has been invoked by the respondent No.1, prima facie case is made out for interim stay of the impugned order passed in a suit filed by the Respondents. Prima facie, there is no substance in the contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent No.1 that the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent No.1 is a dispute between the landlord and tenant and therefore, the suit is maintainable. Even the appellate court has observed that the respondent was inducted by the predecessor in interest of the petitioner i.e. M/s. Caltex India Limited. The Respondent No.1 has himself pleaded that he has been inducted by M/s. Caltex India Limited as a dealer, vide para 4 of the plaint. There is no cogent and reliable evidence at this stage to suggest that the respondents were inducted by the Lessor of the property in question i.e. Natu family, who is the landlord of the petitioner, Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited. Hence, there shall be ad-interim order in terms of prayer clause (c), which reads thus: (c) that pending hearing and final disposal of this petition, the impugned judgment dated 11th February, 2003 be stayed. Learned Counsel for the petitioner requests for stay of this interim order. Prayer is rejected. Sd/- (S. A. BOBDE, J. )