1 WRIT PETITION NO.1769 OF 2001 lgc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.1769 OF 2001 K J Somaiya Medical College Teachers Association and ors. : Petitioners versus Somaiya Vidya Vihar & ors. : Respondents. Mr. Mihir Desai for the Petitioners. Mr. Girish Kulkarni a/w Mr. Anant Upadhya i/by Shaunak Satpute & Co. for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. M D Naik, AGP, for Respondent No.3. Dr.Pradeep Vaishwanar present in person CORAM : P B MAJMUDAR & R M SAVANT, JJ. DATE : 06th August 2010 P.C. 1 The learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have tendered a joint affidavit dated 3rd July 2010 of Dr.Damayanti Atul Shah, Vice President of the Petitioner, Mr.V Ranganathan on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and Dr.(Mrs.) Geeta Niyogi on behalf of the Respondent No.2. In the said affidavit it is mentioned in Para-3 that the parties have entered into an Agreement dated 2nd July 2010 evidencing the terms of settlement between the parties. The agreement is also appended to the said affidavit. The said Affidavit dated 3rd July 2010 along with the Agreement dated 2nd July 2010 is taken on record and marked “X” Collectively for identification. 2 The learned counsel for the Petitioners and the learned counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 seek disposal of the above Petition in terms of the said Agreement which has been arrived at between the parties. 2 WRIT PETITION NO.1769 OF 2001 3 The above Petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the said Agreement dated 2nd July 2010. Rule is accordingly made absolute. 4 However, the Original Petitioner No.4 (but now deleted) Dr.Pradeep Vaishwanar, who is present in court, states that he and some others, who are mentioned in the list appended to the Petition at Exhibit-A are not covered by the said Agreement dated 2nd July 2010 and, therefore, their grievance in the above Petition still survives. It is pointed out on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 that Original Petitioner No.4 and some others, who are mentioned in list, have already left the services of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2. 5 Be that as it may, if the Original Petitioner No.4 and others similarly placed as him are not covered by the Agreement in question, they would be free to adopt such proceedings as may be permissible in law for redressal of their grievances. If such proceedings are filed, needless to say that the same would be decided on their own merits and in accordance with law. [R.M.SAVANT, J] [P.B.MAJMUDAR, J]