AGK AGK AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8648 OF 2007 Vasant Nivrutti Punekar ..Petitioner V/s. The Barsi Municipal Council & Ors. ..Respondents Mr.Sandeep S. Salunkhe for the petitioner. Mr.Nitin Jamdar for respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : SMT.RANJANA DESAI & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 6TH FEBRUARY, 2009. P.C. : 1. The petitioner sought a direction to the respondents to reinstate him in first respondent - municipal council with continuity of service and all other consequential benefits. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. We have also heard Mr.Jamdar, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Mr.Jamdar made a serious grievance that the petitioner has suppressed order dated 5-5-1991 passed by respondent No.1 removing the petitioner from service and also order dated 21-9-1992 passed by the Regional Director of the Municipal Administration, whereby order dated 5-5-1991 was confirmed. Relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Prestige Lights Limited V/s. State Bank Prestige Lights Limited V/s. State Bank Prestige Lights Limited V/s. State Bank of India [(2007) 8 SCC 449] of India [(2007) 8 SCC 449] of India [(2007) 8 SCC 449] and more particularly paragraph 35 thereof, learned counsel submits that since material facts are suppressed by the petitioner, no indulgence should be shown to him. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that there is no suppression. He states that the petitioner is desirous of challenging orders dated 5-5-1991 and 21-9-1992 and hence he has instructions to withdraw the instant petition. In the circumstances, keeping all contentions raised by both the sides open, we permit the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition. 3. We also note that Mr.Jamdar has taken serious exception to the present petition on the ground of laches. This ground is also kept open. 4. Needless to say that if it is legally permissible to the petitioner, the petitioner may challenge the orders dated 5-5-1991 and 21-9-1992 before appropriate forum. We however make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of petitioners case. 5. The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn. (Judge) (Judge)