1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.2253 OF 2002. Narayan Balajirao Bachate. .... PETITIONER. VERSUS Geetai Shikshan Sanstha, Pimpalgaon and others. .... RESPONDENTS. ... Shri B.N. Patil, Advocate for petitioner. Shri M.V. Ghadge, Advocate holding for Shri B.N. Gadegaonkar, Advocate for R.Nos.1,2& 4. Shri S.N. Kendre, A.G.P. for R.No.2. ... CORAM : S.S. SHINDE, J. DATE : 1st October, 2009. PER COURT: 1. The learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as respondent nos.1, 2 and 4 have placed compromise Pursis on record, duly verified by their clients. The parties are present in the Court. On query by this Court, they have stated that compromise is arrived at between them and they have signed compromise terms. 2 2. The learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent No.3 Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nanded submits that since the dispute is between the petitioner and respondents 1, 2 and 4, the respondent no.3 has no objection if the writ petition is disposed of in view of the compromise Pursis. The Compromise Pursis is taken in record and marked as "X" for identification purposes. 3. The writ petition is disposed of in terms of Compromise Pursis. Since the Compromise Pursis mentions that the post is sanctioned, it is expected that the Education Officer (Secondary, Zilla Parishad, Nanded may accord necessary sanction as per Rules and as a routine matter. Writ Petition and the civil application are disposed of in terms of Compromise Pursis. Rule is made absolute in terms of Compromise Pursis. [ S.S. SHINDE, J ] ... PLK/#