1 MSS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 114 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 115 OF 2009 SUSHMA SHANTILAL NAHAR .. PETITIONER Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .. RESPONDENTS Mr. Vikram Nankani i/b Madhu M. Patel for petitioner Mr. S. M. Shah with Ms. Heena Shah for respondents CORAM:SMT.RANJANA DESAI & J. P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE: 3/2/2009 P.C. . Rule. Returnable forthwith. 2. By the impugned order dated 10/10/2008 the Tribunal has dismissed the petitioner’s appeals on the ground that it is time barred. Our attention has been drawn to the judgment of this court dated 13th July, 2006 in M/s. Premier Limited v. Union of India & Ors., Writ Petition No. 1567 of 2005 and companion writ petitions to which one of us 2 (J.P. Devadhar, J.) was party. 3. Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the present petition is covered by the above judgment. Hence we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the Tribunal for consideration of the aspect of limitation, in the light of the above judgment. We make it clear that, we have not considered whether sufficient cause is made out for condonation of delay. That aspect will be considered by the Tribunal independently and in accordance with law. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents says that without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respondents the respondents shall maintain status quo till the disposal of the appeal and for a period of two weeks thereafter. 5. Writ Petition is disposed of in the aforestated terms. JUDGE JUDGE