( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2224 OF 2010 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1085 OF 1991 Mohd. Khaja Habibulla Kha Since deceased by L.Rs. APPLICANTS VERSUS Rent Controller, Jalna & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. S.S. Bora, advocate for the applicants/petitioner. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 22nd February, 2010] PER COURT : 1. The civil application for substitution of legal representatives is filed after considerable delay. However, it appears that the legal representatives of the petitioner were not aware about pendency of the petition. It is stated in the application that the legal representatives came to know about pendency of the writ petition when they were served with notice on 18-01-2010. The explanation appears to be proper. ( 2 ) Ordinarily, after filing of the writ petition, there is no communication gap between the petitioner and his advocate until for some intervening reasons, like filing of the interim application, the advocate is required to call upon the petitioner to do something. In the interest of justice, the explanation is accepted and the delay is condoned. The legal representatives be taken on record. The abatement is set aside. The civil application is allowed. 2. Mr. Bora, on instructions, seeks to withdraw the petition with liberty to file appropriate proceedings. The petition is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty as above. The petition stands disposed of as withdrawn. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/ca2224-2010