LPA 138-10 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.138 OF 2010 Suresh Pandurang Adsule & Ors. .. Appellants Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Ms.Neeta Karnik for appellants Mr.Rahul D. Oak for respondent No.5 Mr.R.M.Patne, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & S.C.Dharmadhikari, J. Date : 7th July 2010. P.C. 1] This appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated 16th December 2009 by which the learned Single Judge declined the appellant – original petitioners’ prayers for review of the order dated 9th December 2009. 2] By the said order dated 9th December 2009 the learned Single Judge had permitted the appellant – petitioner to withdraw the petition with liberty to challenge the enquiry report if adverse to the petitioner. LPA 138-10 2 The petitioner had sought such permission, in view of the order passed on 2nd December 2009 by the learned Single Judge declining to grant any interim orders in the petition in view of the fact that enquiry was pending before the Dy.Registrar, Thane. 3] The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the said observations, the appellant – petitioners were of the bonafide belief that the matter is at large before the Dy.Registrar and no order was operating against the petitioners. Learned Counsel, however, submits that thereafter, the respondents are seeking to make recovery on the basis of the orders which was impugned in the petition and, therefore, the petitioners had moved the learned Single Judge for review of the order dated 9th December 2009 merely for the purposes of getting Writ Petition No.9834 of 2009 restored to the file. 3] Having heard the learned Counsel for the appellant - petitioner, the learned AGP and learned Counsel for respondent No.5, without going into the merits of the controversy amongst the parties, we set aside the LPA 138-10 3 order dated 9th December 2009 of the learned Single Judge and restore Writ Petition No.9834 of 2009 to the file. The matter shall now be listed before the learned Single Judge as per the roster and the learned Single Judge will hear the Counsel for parties and decide the matter in accordance with law. 4] It is clarified that this order may not be treated as expression of any opinion in favour of or against any party as all that we have done is to restore the petition to file. Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. (CHIEF JUSTICE) (S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J)