(-1-) MGN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1007 OF 2007 Samajik Ekta Samiti through its Secretary ..Petitioner Vs. Smt. Prabha P. Sharma & Ors......Respondents Mr. M.V. Limaye for the Petitioner Mr. Shaikh Nasir Masih, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. L.T. Satelkar, AGP for Respondent No.3. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATED: 29TH AUGUST, 2007 DATED: 29TH AUGUST, 2007 DATED: 29TH AUGUST, 2007. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . . . We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. The respondent No.1 has shown us the figures at page 61 which were the figures filed in the earlier petition. Thereafter at the time the matter was before the Officer on record by letter of 13th November, 2006 the detailed calculations of salary arrears were forwarded by the Petitioner. This reflects the position as was filed in the earlier petition. 2. On the other hand we have seen at page 38 the figures filed by the petitioners. As an illustration the salary of the petitioner for the year 2002-2003 would approximately be Rs.1.44,000/-. (-2-) For the the same period from June, 2002 to May, 2003 what the petitioners have shown is Rs.1,18,277/- which is clearly an error. . If the Officer on remand has proceeded on the basis of the Chart produced by the Respondents which correctly reflects the salary, D.A. and other allowances, we do not find that the authority has committed any error as it was always open to the petitioner to dispute the correctness of the figures filed by the respondent No.1. That was not done. In our opinion, therefore, no case made out for interference. Hence petition rejected. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)