:1: IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO.6767 OF 2000 PETITION NO.6767 OF 2000 PETITION NO.6767 OF 2000 Vinod Shamrao Ranpise ...Petitioner Vs. Jain Vidya Prasarak Mandal & Anr. ...Respondents Mr.S.B.Deshmukh h/f.A.V.Anturkar for the Petitioner. Mr.S.A.Sawant for Respondent No.1. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for Respondent No.2. CORAM CORAM CORAM :- :- :- B.H.MARLAPALLE & B.H.MARLAPALLE & B.H.MARLAPALLE & NARESH NARESH NARESH H.PATIL H.PATIL H.PATIL,JJ. JJ. JJ. DATE DATE DATE : 7TH OCTOBER, 2006 : 7TH OCTOBER, 2006 : 7TH OCTOBER, 2006 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The affidavit-in-reply filed by the Management shows that similarly placed Lecturer had approached this Court in Writ Petition No.6763 of 2000, which came to be dismissed on 23rd August,2005. In addition, the impugned order in this Petition has been challenged by the Management in Writ Petition No.1616 of 1997 and in the same, the Petitioner had filed Civil Application No.683 of 2002, which has also been rejected. It is also stated that Contempt Petition has been moved by the Petitioner alleging failure to implement the order passed by the Charity Commissioner and which has been impugned in the Petition (Contempt Petition No.372 of 2005). 2. We cannot entertain multiplicity of litigation challenging the very same order and in any case, if :2: the impugned order is still operating, the Petitioner has a remedy by initiating execution proceedings. 3. Petition is therefore, rejected summarily. (NARESH (NARESH (NARESH H.PATIL,J.) H.PATIL,J.) H.PATIL,J.) (B (B (B.H.MARLAPALLE,J.) H.MARLAPALLE,J.) H.MARLAPALLE,J.)