1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR Civil Application (CAN) No. 22 of 2010 in Contempt Petition No. 89 OF 2009 in Writ Petition No. 3989 of 2007 (D) (Akhil Bhartiya Prathamik Shikshan Sangh ..vs.. Abhijeet Krushna and others) =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Mrs. Neeta Jog, Advocate for the Petitioner-Union, Mr. A.Y.Kapgate, Advocate for Respondents No.1 and 2/applicant Mr. A.G.Mujumdar, A.G.P. for Respondent no.3. None for Respondent no.4. C ORAM : Smt.R.P.SondurBaldota, J. DATED : 18th February, 2010. This civil application is taken out by respondents no.1 and 2 for modification of the order dated 1st February, 2010, by which the petitioner has withdrawn the contempt petition. The withdrawal of the petition was made in view of the alleged assurance given by respondent no.1 to the petitioner that ‘he will look into the grievance of the petitioner union and do the needful’. The respondent no.1 states in this application that he had not given any such assurance to the petitioner and therefore, seeks modification of the order to omit the part of the order mentioning the alleged assurance. The petitioner has filed reply to this civil application in which it comes out with no reason for 2 withdrawal of the petition. The other reason stated in para 2 of the reply is that the scheme of Sarva Shikshan Abhiyan is ending in the year 2012 i.e. on 31st March, 2012 and the members of the petitioner Union do not want to become excess by going on deputation. The learned counsel for respondents no.1 & 2/applicants submits that this would amount to merely replacing reason for the withdrawal mentioned in the order dated 01st February, 2010. He states that he has no instructions that the scheme of Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan is ending on 31st March, 2012. The learned counsel for the petitioner union submits that the petitioner is willing for the modification as sought by the applicants. In the circumstances, the civil application is allowed. The following portion “At para 2 of the Civil Application, it is stated that respondent no.1 has assured the petitioner that he will look into the grievance of the petitioner union and do the needful” is deleted from the order dated 1st February, 2010 and the order be read accordingly. Civil Application is disposed of. No costs. JUDGE. Diwale