1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5128 OF 2009 Bank of Baroda, having its Head Office at Mandvi, Baroda, Gujrat State and having its Branch at Samarthnagar, Aurangabad, Through its authorized Officer. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) Jeevankumar s/o Purandarsa Jain, R/o- House No.A-117/2, Sudarshan Nagar, N-11, Hudco, Aurangabad-03, 2) Pravin Kumar s/o Purandarsa Jain, R/o- Plot No.5, N-11, Cidco, Aurangabad, 3) Narendra Kumar s/o Purandarsa Jain, R/o- Plot No.5, N-11, Cidco, Aurangabad, 4) Shri Dr. Shamsuddin, Hon'ble Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Mr.S.S. Deo Advocate h/f. Mr. P.K. Joshi Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr.S.S. Deve Advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr.Alok Sharma Standing Counsel for Respondent No.4. ... 2 CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL & K.U. CHANDWAL, JJ. DATE : 16TH NOVEMBER, 2009. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. We have perused the order passed by this Court on 25th September, 2009. Dr. Shamsuddin, Presiding Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal, Aurangabad was made party in person. We find, in the Petition, majority of the grounds are devoted for making allegations against Respondent No.4. Respondent No.4 had no other alternative but to file affidavit in reply refuting the allegations and explaining the facts and circumstances. This itself is highly objectionable conduct on the part of the Petitioner. Learned counsel Shri Deo holding for Mr. P.K. Joshi, placed on record a communication made by Mr.W.J. Gaikwad, Senior Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Aurangabad, addressed to Shri P.K. Joshi, Advocate, High Court, dated 16th November, 2009. The same is taken on record and marked as "X" 3 for identification. The contents of the said letter, which is addressed to the learned counsel, speaks that he shall withdraw the Writ Petition which was filed by him on behalf of the Bank. It is further stated in the letter that the Bank is withdrawing the allegations made in the Writ Petition. 3. The Petitioner is said to be a Nationalized Bank. Shri W.J. Gaikwad, Senior Branch Manager, Bank of Baroda, Aurangabad is present in the Court consequent to the order passed by this Court on 25th September, 2009. He is unable to clearly explain the reasons for making such allegations against Respondent No.4 by making him party. Such conduct on the part of the responsible institution is required to be deprecated. It is contemptuous in nature. The counsel for the Petitioner has prayed for withdrawal of the Petition and expressed his concern for making such allegations. The counsel submits that the Petitioner is apologizing. Learned counsel submits that the withdrawal of the Petition, therefore, be permitted. 4. Learned counsel Shri Sharma and Shri Deve 4 appearing for Respondents raise serious objections for permitting withdrawal of the Petition. Instead, the counsel submits that in the light of the seriousness of the allegations, Petition be dismissed with heavy costs. 5. We find substance in the submissions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents. We have perused the affidavit in reply filed by Respondent No.4. We reject the request of the Petitioner for withdrawal of the Petition. The Petition stands dismissed subject to the payment of cost of Rs.25,000/-. The Petitioner shall deposit the cost in the Registry of this Court within four weeks from today. The Registrar of this Court is directed to forward the copy of this order to Regional Assistant Manager, Bank of Baroda, Nagpur. [K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.] asb/NOV09/wp5128.09