IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1314 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.1983 OF 2003 -------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memorandum Court’s or Judge’s of Coram, appearances, Court’s Orders orders or directions and registrar’s Orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr.Rui Rodrigues for applicant Mr.R.A.Shaikh for respondents CORAM : P.V.KAKADE, J. DATE : 28TH APRIL,2006 P.C.: 1. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 2. The advocate for the respondent has in fact no objection for restoration of the petition. However, he has objection to restore the interim relief which was granted in the Writ Petition dated 31.3.2000. However, it is needless to mention that if the petition is restored, all the consequential benefits must go to the petitioner such as revival of the interim reliefs. In the present case there is no reason why the interim relief should be segregated and rejected. In view of this aspect, the application is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (a). It is submitted on behalf of the respondent that the hearing of the petition be expedited. However, it is submitted on behalf of the applicant that the hearing of the petition is already expedited and therefore, no order to expedite the hearing again need be passed. The applicant to pay the cost of Rs.500/= to be donated to the Maharashtra State Legal Authority within two weeks.