1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.134 OF 2010 1) Sayyad s/o Manjoor Mujaffar, R/o-Bhatangali, Tq. & Dist-Latur, 2) Sudhakar Babruwan Adgale, R/o- Raje Shivaji Nagar, Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur, 3) Raju s/o Narayan Kamble, R/o-Vikasnagar, Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur. 4) Dhananjay Subhash Hale, R/o-Shirshi, Tq. & Dist-Latur. 5) Suman Manikrao Reddy, R/o-Zinat Society, Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur. 6) Jalsabai d/o Laxman Kadam, R/o-Peth, Tq. & Dist-Latur. 7) Rajendra Chandrakant Sakolkar, R/o-Sakol, Tq-Shirur Anantpal, Dist-Latur, 8) Rajkumar Bapurao Baikre, R/o-Umerga, Tq-Jalkot, Dist-Latur. ...PETITIONERS. VERSUS 2 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, 2) The Commissioner Handicap Welfare, Maharashtra State, Pune, Dist-Pune, 3) The Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Latur Division, Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur. 4) Social Welfare Officer, Group-'A', Zilla Parishad, Latur, Tq. & Dist-Latur. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.A.V. Patil Advocate for Petitioners. Shri.S.K. Tambe, A.G.P. for Respondents. ... CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 11TH JANUARY, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, matter is taken up for final hearing at the stage of 3 admission itself. . The principal grievance in this Petition is that although the Petitioners are entitled to be absorbed on account of termination of their services due to cancellation of permission of the Handicapped School, the authorities have failed to discharge that obligation so far. According to the Petitioners, the representations have been made to the authorities in this behalf, which have remained unattended. 2. In our opinion, if the Petitioners have already made representations, the authorities, in particular, Respondent No.2 is obliged to consider the same one way or the other, within reasonable time. By this order, we direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the said representation(s), if any and also treat the present Petition as final representation and pass appropriate order as may be advised. That be done within six weeks from today and compliance report be submitted in the 4 Registry of this Court. 3. Although specific prayer is not made, it does appear from the recitals of the Petition that the Petitioners have approached this Court byway of present Writ Petition not only for reliefs for themselves but also for similarly placed persons like that of the Petitioners working in the same Handicapped School. Needless to observe that the Respondent No.2 shall consider the representation(s) of all the employees working in the concerned Handicapped School even if they are not Petitioners in the present Petition. 4. Rule is made absolute on the terms indicated above. [S.S. SHINDE, J.] [A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.] asb/JAN10/wp134.10