1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 163 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO. 163 OF 2006 WRIT PETITION NO. 163 OF 2006 Sumer Corporation ... Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. ... Respondents Mr. A.Y. Sakhare, Sr. Advocate i/by Kishore Thakoredas & Co. for Petitioner. Mr. R.M. Sawant, Govt. Pleader for R. No. 1. Mr. P.A. Sebastian for R. No.4. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ. DATED : MARCH 13, 2006 DATED : MARCH 13, 2006 DATED : MARCH 13, 2006 P.C. . Considering the prayer Clauses, and the documents annexed to the Petition, this appears to be a dispute between the Petitioner on the one hand and Respondent No. 4 on the other in the matter of implementation of the scheme sanctioned by Respondent No. 2. Whatever disputes the Petitioner may have, it will be open for him to represent to Respondent No. 2. The Respondent No. 2 after hearing the Petitioner as also the Respondent No. 4 to pass appropriate orders according to law. If the representation is made 2 within two weeks from today, the same should be disposed of within four weeks thereafter, after hearing all the parties. Needless to say that we have not gone into the merits of the matter and all issues are left open to be considered by the Respondent No. 2. (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA,J.)