IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Letters Patent Appeal No.257 of 2006 in Writ Petition No.1282 of 2006 Aushadhi Bhavan ..Appellant vs. Shri Balu T.Banchoode and other ..Respondents Shri S.M.Naik with Shri Shailesh Mane for appellant. Smt.Seema Sarnaik for respondent. CORAM: S.B.MHASE & CORAM: S.B.MHASE & CORAM: S.B.MHASE & Smt.NISHITA MAHTRE JJ. Smt.NISHITA MAHTRE JJ. Smt.NISHITA MAHTRE JJ. 5th February, 2007 5th February, 2007 5th February, 2007 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel. 2. So far as the aspect of reinstatement is concerned, both the Courts have concurrently held that the respondent is entitled for reinstatement. We are told across the bar that the order of reinstatement is in force since 1996 and by the time i.e. as of today the employee is retired from service and the fact that the learned single Judge has denied the entire back wages also pursuades us not to entertain the appeal. We find that there is nno substance in the matter. We refrain to entertain the appeal. Appeal is thus rejected. (Smt.NISHITA MHATRE J.) (S.B.MHASE J.) (Smt.NISHITA MHATRE J.) (S.B.MHASE J.) (Smt.NISHITA MHATRE J.) (S.B.MHASE J.)