1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2734/2007 ( Central Bank of India . .vrs. Sales Tax Officer and others ) WRIT PETITION NO. 2592/2007 ( Diwakar Krushnarao Sakhale and others .. vrs.. Central Bank of India and others ) WRIT PETITION NO. 1012/2007 ( Central Bank of India . .vrs. Dy. Commissioner of Sales Tax and others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & F.M. REIS, JJ. DATED : JULY 22, 2009. Heard Shri M.D. Samel and Shri S.U. Nemade, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Mirza, learned A.G.P. for Sales Tax Department, Shri S.K.Mishra, learned Counsel for Debt Recovery Officer and Shri S.K. Pardhi, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 in Writ Petition No. 1012/2007. Grievance is while disposing of Writ Petition No. 5293/2004, this Court made certain observations about pari pasu distribution of proceeds recovered by secured creditors and also directed the D.R.A.T. to issue appropriate guidelines in the matter. Guidelines issued on 22.12.2004 are alleged to be not in compliance with those directions of this Court. The judgment of High Court is reported at 2004 (4) Mh.L.J. 932 (Pandurang Keshav Gorwadkar .vrs. Paper and Pulp 2 Conversions Ltd.). The challenge before this Court is to orders of distribution passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal by following those guidelines. The workmen, secured creditors have approached this Court making grievance. The grievance made is about the guidelines framed on administrative side and against orders passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Admittedly, the petitioners have got a remedy of filing appeal before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. In said appeal on judicial side they can point out how the guidelines issued on administrative side are not in accordance with the directions of High Court. Thus an alternate and equally efficacious remedy is available to the petitioners. Hence without observing anything on the merits of the matter and by continuing the interim arrangement till appropriate orders are passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, we dispose of these Writ Petitions, without any orders as to costs. The petitioners are at liberty to approach the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal in appeals for redressal of their grievance. Writ Petition No.1012/2007 is already admitted for final hearing. However, in view of the above orders passed in Writ Petition Nos. 2734 and 2592 of 2007 the Writ Petition No.1012/2007 is accordingly disposed of. Rule discharged. No costs. Interim arrangement, if any, as ordered in this matter to continue till appropriate orders are passed by the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal. JUDGE JUDGE Rgd.