1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5752/2006 Murlidhar Gokuldas Khadse ..vs.. Dhiraj Shrikrushnarao Waindeshkar & Ors. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's order ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM:- R. V. MORE, J. DATED :- 28 th January, 2008. Civil Application No. 8894/2007 1. Mr. Saboo, Advocate for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the application with liberty to challenge order dated 31.08.2007. 2. Leave granted. The application stands disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Writ Petition No. 5752/2006 1. Heard Mr. Saboo, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Jibhkate, Advocate for respondent No. 1, Mr. Kothale, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, Mr. Patel, A.G.P. for respondent No. 4 and Mr. Patil, Advocate for respondent Nos. 6 to 8. 2 2. The petition is directed against order dated 21.04.2005 passed by One Member Grievance Committee for entertaining complaints of Shikshan Sevak at Nagpur in Appeal No. 61/2004. The aforesaid appeal was filed by respondent No. 1 challenging his termination. The present petitioner was respondent No. 3 in the appeal. The learned President of One Member Grievance Committee by the order impugned in the writ petition set aside the termination of respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 2- Management was directed to reinstate respondent No. 1. The petitioner, who was respondent No. 3 in appeal, was also came to be terminated and, therefore, the petitioner filed present writ petition. 3. After hearing learned counsel for the respective parties, the petition was admitted and the interim stay was also granted by order dated 12.03.2007. 4. Mr. Saboo, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, after grant of interim stay, was reinstated on 25.03.2007, however, his services again came to be terminated by order dated 31.08.2007 and, therefore, he filed Civil Application 3 No. 8894/2007, which is already withdrawn today with liberty to file proceeding challenging the above said order of termination. 5. In this view of the matter, nothing survives in the present writ petition the same is, therefore, disposed of with no order as to costs. Needless to mention that the petitioner is independently entitled to challenge the fresh termination order dated 31.08.2007. 6. At this stage, Mr. Saboo, Advocate further states that direction about termination of services by the President of One Member Committee in the impugned order should not come in the petitioner's way while challenging fresh order of termination dated 31.08.2007. Mr.Kothale, Advocate for respondent No. 2 states that the petitioner was reinstated in pursuance of the interim order of this Court and hence, order of the President of One Member Committee directing termination of petitioner's services does not survive . JUDGE kahale