1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8437 OF 2009 Sudhagad Education Society & Anr. ....Petitioners V/s. Chandrakant G. Gaikwad ....Respondent Mr.Mandar Limaye with Mr.Mahendra Agavekar for the Petitioners. Mr.Chandrkant G. Gaikwad - Respondent in person present. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATE : 23RD FEBRUARY, 2010. P.C. :- 1. The Respondent appears in person. By the impugned order, it was held that the Respondent was entitled to permanency from the date of the filing of the complaint and all consequential and monetary benefits arising out of the permanency with effect from the date of the filing of the complaint. The complaint was filed in the year 2007. The impugned order was passed ex-parte. 2. The parties have informed me that the matter has now been settled in terms of the consent minutes of order signed by the parties and the Petitioner’s advocate. The Respondent appears in person. The consent minutes of order have been explained in Marathi to the Respondent by the Petitioners’ advocate, who has also identified him. I have also explained the same to the Respondent in Hindi. He stated that he is agreeable to the 2 same. 3. In the circumstances, the impugned order is substituted by the consent minutes of order, which are tendered in Court, taken on record and marked “X”. 4. The Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.