1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 2380/2010 Bharat Chimnaji Ade & ors. ..vs.. State of Maharashtra and anr. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Harkare, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Jichkar, A.G.P. for respondent-State. CORAM:- S. A. BOBDE & MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATED:- OCTOBER 29, 2010 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has challenged termination of his services effected in the year 2004. There is no appropriate explanation for delay. Mr. Harkare, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner has been making representations up to the year 2008 and, thereafter, did not take any action because there was change in the policy and the respondents had offered employment. The delay is not sufficiently explained. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE kahale