1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2551 of 2010 Archana Rajendra Purohit ....Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ....Respondents Mr. A.R.Gole, advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondents. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND R.M.SAVANT, JJ DATED:- April 06, 2010 P.C. Preliminary question about the maintainability of this Writ Petition was examined by us in the context of order dated 14th December, 2009 in Writ Petition No. 1902/2009. According to Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the earlier Writ Petition has been dismissed in limine and not on merits as such. In such a situation, it is open to the Petitioner to pursue remedy of fresh Writ Petition upon production of further and better material to support his claim. 2. To buttress his submission, reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Pujari Bai etc. vs. Madan Gopal (dead) L.Rs. Smt. Jaiwanti & ors. reported in AIR 1989 Supreme Court 1764 in Paragraph 24 thereof, the Court has observed that when a writ petition after contest is disposed of on merits by a speaking order, the question decided in that petition would operate as res judicata, but not a dismissal in limine or 2 dismissal on the ground of laches or availability of alternative remedy. From the order dated 14th December, 2009 we find that the earlier Division Bench while dealing with Writ Petition No. 1902/2009 has examined the matter on merits which is clear from the finding recorded that the material on record does not show that the management is paying less salary to the Petitioner than the management is under obligation to pay. In the circumstances, the decision pressed into service is of no avail to the Petitioner. Thus, the Petition is not maintainable. 3. Realising this position, Counsel for the Petitioner submits that in that case the Petitioner would withdraw the present Writ Petition and may file Review Petition in the disposed of Writ Petition so as to pursue the remedy available in law. We have no difficulty in acceding to this request in the interest of justice as according to the Petitioner further and new material has become available to the Petitioner after the dismissal of the earlier Writ Petition. 3. In the circumstances, this Petition is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to the Petitioner to pursue remedy of review or appeal against the said order, as may be advised. (R.M. SAVANT, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)