1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5300 OF 2009 Gulabrao Dnyanoba Babar. .. Petitioner V/s The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr. Pratap Patil for the Petitioner. Mr. A.B.Vagyani, AGP for the State. CORAM : P.B.MAJMUDAR & R.G.KETKAR, JJ. 23rd March, 2010. P.C.: 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already made a representation to the Education Officer on 6th March, 2010. He fairly submitted that his representation may be directed to be considered by the Education Officer only with regard to prayer clause (a), though he has made other prayers too in the representation. He states that the petitioner will not press the other prayers. 2. In view of the same, the Education Officer, to whom the representation dated 6th March, 2010 is made, may consider the said representation qua prayer clause (a) and take appropriate decision with regard to prayer clause (a) in the representation within a period of two months from today and communicate the said decision to the petitioner. If the petitioner has any grievance thereafter, he may take appropriate 2 proceedings in accordance with law. 3. Subject to the aforesaid, petition is disposed of. (R.G.KETKAR, J.) (P.B.MAJMUDAR, J.)