1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION W. NO.1503 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.856 OF 2007 (The State of Maharashtra and others vs. Madhav Istari Gopatwar and others) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Smt. B.H. Dangre, Additional Government Pleader for the petitioners. Shri N.R. Saboo, Advocate for the respondent nos. 4, 6, 8, 9, 12 and 13. Shri Desai, Advocate for the respondent nos. 15 and 16. -------- CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE AND P.B.VARALE, JJ. DATED : JUNE 11, 2010 Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Leave to amend. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. By this civil application, respondent nos. 4, 6, 8, 9, 12 and 13 are seeking permission to withdraw the amounts mentioned in paragraph (2) of the civil application. It appears that the amounts 2 mentioned are deposited by the petitioners in the office of Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur towards the arrears as were due in terms of the order of the Tribunal in their faovur. The judgment and order passed by the Tribunal, which is impugned in the present petition, disposed of a group of original applications including the original application filed by the respondents bearing Original Application No.925/1993. This Court is informed that the State has challenged the impugned judgment of the Tribunal by filing separate writ petitions in this Court. One of such writ petitions bears Writ Petition No.825/2007. This Court is further informed that though the writ petitions filed by the State were admitted, the interim relief was refused and in view thereof, the respondents in those writ petitions including the respondents in Writ Petition No.825/2007 filed applications for withdrawal of the amounts deposited by the State. The application filed in Writ Petition No.825/2007 was allowed vide order dated 18/9/2008 by this Court. In view thereof, learned 3 Counsel for the respondents-applicants seeks similar order in the present civil application. The learned Additional Government Pleader for the petitioners has not opposed the prayer made by the learned Counsel for the applicants/ respondent nos. 4, 6, 8, 9, 12 and 13. Hence, this civil application is disposed of by the following order : The applicants/respondent nos. 4, 6, 8, 9, 12 and 13 are allowed to withdraw the amounts mentioned in paragraph (2) of the civil application against their names subject to furnishing solvent surety to the satisfaction of the Registrar of the Tribunal. JUDGE JUDGE khj