(-1-) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3172 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3172 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3172 OF 2005 IN IN IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 35028 OF 2003 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 35028 OF 2003 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 35028 OF 2003 Union of India & Anr ...Applicants Versus Shri. Anil Goel ...Respondent ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3173 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3173 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3173 OF 2005 IN IN IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 35033 OF 2003 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 35033 OF 2003 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 35033 OF 2003 Union of India & Anr ...Applicants Versus Shri. Rajeev Dhar ...Respondent ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3174 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3174 OF 2005 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3174 OF 2005 IN IN IN FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 35037 OF 2003 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 35037 OF 2003 FIRST APPEAL (ST.) NO. 35037 OF 2003 Union of India & Anr ...Applicants Versus Shri. Madhav Shenbaugh ...Respondent ..... Shri. Y.R. Mishra with T.C. Kaushik, counsel for the Applicant ..... CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND DR. S. RADHAKRISHNAN AND SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. SMT. V.K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ. (-2-) DATED: 5TH DECEMBER, 2005 DATED: 5TH DECEMBER, 2005 DATED: 5TH DECEMBER, 2005 P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- 1. Heard the learned counsel for the Applicants. None appears for the Respondent though served. 2. For the reasons stated in the Civil Applications, sufficient cause is made out. There is no case of inaction, negligence or want of bonafide. Hence, Civil Applications are made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). Place Appeals for admission on 19.12.2005. *****