1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR Civil Application (CAW) No. 1357 of 2010 in Writ Petition No. 358 of 2010 Gajanansingh Balkishansingh Gour ...VERSUS.. Addl. Divl. Commissioner, Nagpur & others Civil Application (CAW) No. 1358 of 2010 in Writ Petition No. 348 of 2010 Santoshkumar Balramsingh Gaherwar ...VERSUS.. Addl. Divl. Commissioner, Ngp & oths =-=-=---=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. Court's or Judges Order =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==- C ORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : 07th MAY, 2010. Heard Mr. A.Y.Kapgate, learned counsel for the applicants/respondents no.2,3 & 4, Mr. I.N.Choudhari, learned counsel for respective non-applicants/petitioners and Mr. A.S.Sonare for Respondent/non-applicant no.1. Learned counsel Mr. Choudhari is opposing recall. He states that though the reasons given by the original respndents in writ petition may be genuine, the order imposing costs is proper because of harassment of the petitioners. The respondents had taken appropriate steps within time and because of some mistake by the Clerk of the learned counsel representing them, the Vakalatnama could not be filed. In the circumstances, the direction to respondents to pay costs to petitioners is hereby recalled. Civil Applications are allowed accordingly. JUDGE. 2 Diwale