1 C.A.No.17143/10 with C.A.No.17142/10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.17143 OF 2010 IN W.P.NO.676 OF 2010 WITH C.A.NO.17142 OF 2010 IN W.P.NO.713 OF 2010. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders Mr.K.J.Suryawanshi, advocate for the applicant. Mr.Girish Rane, advocate for Respondents. CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J. Date : 20.12.2011. PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. The Writ Petitions are filed by Maharashtra State Cooperative Agriculture Rural Multipurpose Development Bank Ltd., and Osmanabad District Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Multipurpose Development Bank against the order passed by the Industrial Court. The present Civil Applications are filed by the original petitioner No.1 Maharashtra State Cooperative Agriculture and Rural Multipurpose Development Bank Ltd. The said Civil 2 C.A.No.17143/10 with C.A.No.17142/10 Applications are filed to segregate themselves as petitioners and liberty is sought to file fresh Writ Petition on the ground that now in view of the bifurcation of the Banks, there is conflict of interest between both the petitioners. The learned counsel for the original petitioner No.2 has no objection for the same. 3. Mr.Rane, learned counsel for the original complainant submits that the petitioner No.1 may not be allowed to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to file a separate fresh Writ Petition. The learned counsel submits that the liability is crystallised by the order of the Industrial court. So also if the petitioner No.1 is allowed to file separate Writ Petition, there would be delay as these Writ Petitions are pending before this Court for more than two (2) years and if they file a fresh Writ Petition, the process would again start afresh. 4. It appears that there is bifurcation of the Banks. The petitioner No.1 has already assailed the impugned order. It would not cause any prejudice to either of the parties if the petitioner No.1 is allowed to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to file separate Writ Petition. The fresh Writ Petition that is filed can be clubbed with the present Writ Petitions. In view of the above, the applications are allowed in terms of prayer clause (B) with direction that the applicants in the said Civil Applications shall file fresh Writ Petition if they choose to by 6.1.2012. 3 C.A.No.17143/10 with C.A.No.17142/10 5. The petitioner No.2 in the original Writ Petition will be the sole petitioner and the said petitioner shall transpose the petitioner No.1 as Respondent. 6. The Civil Applications are disposed of. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) Dt.20.12.2011. asp/office/Ca17143.10 4 C.A.No.17143/10 with C.A.No.17142/10