wp8391­10.doc 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8391 OF 2010 ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.2808/2010 & 2857/10 Smt.Kavita Annasaheb Jong & Anr .. Petitioners versus Jayram Krishnarao Patil & Ors .. Respondents Mr.Amit Borkar for the petitioners. Mr.G.M.Savagave for respondent No.1. Ms.P.S.Cardozo, A.G.P for respondent No.4. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. 14th JUNE 2011. P.C.: . Mentioned. Not on board. Heard both sides. Perused the application for speaking to the minutes of the order dated 7th June 2011. 2 My attention is invited to para 8 of the order. It is submitted by Mr.Savgave that the application made by respondent No.3 Suresh Kudale was not to withdraw from the wp8391­10.doc 2 proceedings but to transpose himself as the respondent. I do not see how there is any ambiguity on this count in the order because the adjudicating authority is fully aware of the application and the nature of the relief claimed therein. Therefore, the apprehension of Mr.Savgave that he would misconstrue the order and misapply it and treat the application as application for withdrawal of the said Mr.Suresh Kudale is not well founded. The order does not raise any doubt either in the minds of the parties or the Collector. He must deal with the application filed as it is and that the emphasis in the order was on the submission that the said application is kept pending. No other clarification on this order is needed. Application for speaking to minutes is disposed off. (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)