1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1688 OF 2010 (Baban S. Sangle & Anr. vs. Divisional Controller, MSRTC, Akola & Anr.) 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, J. APRIL 19, 2010. Heard Shri Varma, petitioner No.2 in person and Shri Wankhede, learned counsel for the respondents. During hearing, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, representative Shri Varma, petitioner No. 2 stated that petitioner No. 1 is due for retirement on superannuation within four months and petitioner No. 1 has no objection to work in the office during the pendency of proceedings before the Labour Court. Shri Wankhede, learned counsel states that the respondents will have to work out whether such arrangement can be made. I have considered the controversy on merits. The passengers found without ticket have disclosed in their spot statement that running ticketing was going on and it is within one kilometer of their boarding, the bus was checked. There is no whisper of violation of “issue 2 and start rule” in charge sheet or before the lower courts. The past service record of petitioner No. 1, however appears to be not satisfactory. In the circumstances, the interest of justice can be met with by accepting the request of the petitioners and by directing Respondent No. 1 to permit petitioner No. 1 to work in the office on appropriate equivalent work/ post. This arrangement will be purely temporary and without prejudice to the rights of the parties. The proceedings in Complaint ULP No. 246 of 1999 pending on the file of the Labour Court, Akola, are expedited and Labour Court, Akola, is directed to decide the Complaint itself as early as possible and in any case by 31st July 2010. With these directions and by making rule absolute accordingly, Writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.