1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR C.A.S. No.128/2010 in Second Appeal No.422/2009 ( Victor Bastian + 1 ..V/s.. Ignatius Bastian & others) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Anjan De, counsel for the applicants. Mr. S.D. Abhyankar, counsel for the respondents. Coram : F.M.REIS, J. Dated : 3rd March 2010. Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned counsel for the respondents. This is an application filed by the respondent no.1 for modification of the order dated 12/1/2010. It is the contention of the respondent that the second appeal No.422/2009 was disposed of by this court on 12/1/2010 on the basis of the minutes of the order submitted by both the counsels. It is further his contention that after the said order a policy decision was taken to the effect that the suspension which was issued to the applicant no.2 was sought to be revoked as can be seen from the letter dated 19/1/2010 2 addressed by the appellant no.2 to the Education Officer. As such it is the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that the appellant no.2 was not entitled to address such a letter and revoke the suspension which was already in force. On the other hand, the leaned counsel for the appellants has disputed the contentions of the learned counsel for the respondent no.1. It is his contention that the letter addressed to the Education Officer dated 19/1/2010 was not issued on the basis of the order passed by this Court dated 12/1/2010 but in view of the resolution which was passed on 9/1/2010. It is further contended that the Education Officer was asked to decide the question about the suspension of the appellant no.2 after hearing the appellant no.2, by the Division Bench of this Court. Consequently an order was passed by the Education Officer on 23rd December 2009. The learned counsel fairly conceded that on the basis of the order dated 12/1/2010, the appellant no.2 could not have taken a policy decision in the manner sought to be disclosed in the letter dated 19/1/2010 but however, he contends that considering the resolution was passed much earlier, the appellant no.2 has not issued the said letter pursuant to the order passed by this court dated 12/1/2010. 3 Be that as it may, without going into the correctness or otherwise of the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties to the effect that the said letter was issued on the basis of a resolution passed on 19th January 2010, nevertheless, I find that the learned counsel for the appellant has fairly conceded that the said communication could not have been issued pursuant to the order dated 12/1/2010. The question as to whether the resolution was passed on 19/1/2010 which is otherwise disputed by the respondent will have to be adjudicated at an appropriate forum. The matter in that regard is not the subject matter of the above appeal preferred the by appellants. Without going into the merits of the contentions of the parties, it is hereby clarified that the letter dated 19/1/2010 cannot be issued on the basis of the order passed by this Court dated 12/1/2010, as major decisions have been forbidden. With the above clarification, the application stands disposed of. Judge. Tambaskar.