1 wp2158.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 2158 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Dr. Sachin Tukaram Bandichhode ...Respondent ... WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1611 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Dr. Vijaykumar Ratankumar Guttikar ...Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1802 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Dr. Sushilkumar Yallappa Sonawane ...Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1812 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. 2 wp2158.11 Dr. Smita Snehalkumar Shete ...Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2159 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Dr. Prakash Hindurao Waghmare ...Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2160 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Dr. Bipin Valchand Daga ...Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2161 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. : Petitioners V/s. Dr. Santoshkumar Nagnath Deshmukh ...Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2173 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Dr. Audumber Neminath Maske ...Respondent 3 wp2158.11 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2489 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Dr. Smita Shashikant Pudale ...Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2493 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Dr. Santosh Jagannath Haralkar ...Respondent AND WRIT PETITION NO. 2536 OF 2011 The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. Dr. Jayashri Anand Khiste ...Respondent .... Mr. S.K. Shinde, Addl. G.P. for the petitioners . Mr.K.M.Mhatre i/b. Mr.Vikram Pai for the respondents in W.P.Nos. 1802/2011, 1812/2011 and 2489/2011. Respondents present in person in W.P.Nos.2158/11, 1611/11, 2159/11, 2160/11, 2161/11, 2173/11, 2493/11 & 2536/11. .... 4 wp2158.11 CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,JJ. DATE : APRIL 05, 2011. P.C.: On the earlier occasion, the respondents, who were appearing in person, had invited our attention to the fact that the questions raised by the petitioners, State of Maharashtra, in the present petitions have already been answered against the State in Writ Petition no.3484 of 2005 and companion matters decided on 27.11.2088 and once again in Writ Petition No.372 of 2011 decided on 24.1.2011. Besides, the decision in Writ Petition No.3484 of 2005 was carried in appeal before the Apex Court in State of Maharashtra & anr. etc. v. Sangita, etc. (Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) 18902 – 18915 of 2010). Even the said Appeals have been rejected by the Apex Court. In this view of the matter, these Writ Petitions will have to meet the same fate. However, the learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader had sought adjournment to take instructions in this regard. 2. Today, the matters are taken up for hearing. The learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader, in all fairness, points out that the issues raised in the present Writ Petitions are squarely answered against the State in the Writ Petitions referred to above which decision has been upheld by the Apex 5 wp2158.11 Court. In that view of the matter, even these Petitions deserve to be dismissed. 3. At the same time, the learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader brought to our notice that after the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.372 of 2011, the issue has been referred to a larger Bench of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. We fail to understand as to how the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal can re-open the issue either directly or indirectly once the same has been answered against the State of Maharashtra and which view has been confirmed by the Apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra & anr. etc. v. Sangita etc. (supra). The learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader submits that perhaps the Tribunal was not informed of the fact that the High Court has already answered the issue against the State and that view has been confirmed by the Apex Court. That, however, cannot be the basis to depart from the view already taken by this Court which has been confirmed by the Apex Court. It will be open to the petitioners to bring it to the notice of the Tribunal the above said developments so that the reference made to the larger Bench can be answered appropriately. We express no opinion in that behalf. 4. The petitions are dismissed for the same reasons recorded in 6 wp2158.11 earlier Writ Petitions preferred by the State of Maharashtra which have been dismissed and which view has been confirmed by the Apex Court on merits. (A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.) (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,J.)