1` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR C.A.No. 5877/08 in W.P.No. 4348/2002 Yavatmal Islamia Anglo Urdu Education Society, Yavatmal and another vs. Smt. Naseem Bano Syed Asgar Ali and another. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : A.P.LAVANDE, J DATE : 25.08.2008 Heard Mr. V.A.Kothale, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Joharapurkar, learned counsel for respondent no.1. 2. By this application the petitioners seek following reliefs. i) Condone the delay committed by petitioner management in complying with the interim order dated 11.10.2004 as respondent no.1 is allowed to join on duty against the post of Assistant Teacher in respondent no.2 school with effect from 14.9.2005 and also made payment of salary with effect from 10.3.2003 till 13.9.2005 till the date of joining i.e. 13.9.2005. ii) Consequently writ petition no. 4348/02 be restored alolng with interim order dated 10.3.2003 by setting aside the order of non compliance dated 11.10.2004 for disposal of petition on its own merits in the interest of justice. iii) Grant any other relief that deem suitable in the circumstances of the case. 2` 3. According to Mr. Kothale, pursuant to the orders passed by this court the respondentno.1 has been reinstated and all the back wages are paid to her and, therefore, Writ Petition No. 4348/2002 filed by the petitioners deserves to be restored and disposed of on merits. 4. On behalf of the respondent no.1 Mr. Joharapurkar has invited my attention to the order dated 11.10.2004 passed by this court by which this court directed the petitioners to deposit the entire amount of salary of respondent no.1 for the period from 10.3.2003 within a period of 8 weeks from that date with a further direction that if the said order was not complied with the writ petition would stand dismissed without any reference to the court. 5. It is not in dispute that the entire salary of the respondent no.1 was not deposited within a period of 8 weeks and the payment was made much later. It is also not in dispute that the petition stood dismissed for non-compliance of the order dated 11.10.2004. 6. According to Mr. Kothale, learned counsel for the petitioners the petition was dismissed without hearing the petitioners and since the petitioners have now paid the entire arrears of wages and reinstated the respondent no.1 the petition deserves to be restored. According to Mr. Joharapurkar once the petition stood dismissed the question of restoring the petition merely on the ground that compliance has been done at a later stage does not arisde. 3` 7. As stated above, the petition stood dismissed for non compliance of the order dated 11.10.2004. Moreover, it is also not in dispute that the L.P.A. preferred against the order dated 11.10.2004 has also been dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court. In this background, the filing of this application is nothing but anabuse of the process of the court. The learned counsel for the petitioners was given an opportunity to withdraw the application. However, he insisted that the application be disposed of on merit. In view of the above the application is dismissed with costs of Rs. 2500/- to the respondent no.1. The costs shall be paid within four weeks. The application stands disposed of. Judge patle