-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2284 OF 2006 Ramesh Laxman Nama ..Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents Mr. Vinod Shetty for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Jadhav, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondents. CORAM: J.N . PATEL, Ag. C.J., & S.C . DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE: MARCH 20, 2007. P.C. Matter not on Board. This petition has been circulated before us for being disposed of at the stage of admission. It is the case of the petitioner that he has been transferred by order dated 10th August, 2006, which is for extraneous consideration. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had complied with the impugned transfer order dated 10th August, 2006. But as the post on which the petitioner claims to be repatriated is likely to fall vacant because the person occupying the post i.e. Respondent No.4 is going to retire on superannuation, the petitioner has made a representation -2- to the competent authority to consider his case for re-transfer on the said post. 2. In our view, the authorities can very well consider the represenetation made by the petitioner, as the petitioner is not pressing for the reliefs sought for in the petition, if his representation is considered. The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 submits that if the petitioner has made a representation, the authorities would consider it on its own merits and as per the service conditions of the petitioner. In view of this, nothing survives in the petition. The same is accordingly disposed of. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.