wp6295.09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6295 OF 2009 Pravin s/o Rustamrao Dukare .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & othes .. RESPONDENTS Mr. H.D. Patil, advocate holding for Mr. P.B. Patil, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.R. Kale, AGP for respondent no. 1. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent nos. 2 to 4. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6645 OF 2009 Shri Dinkar Ramrao Kadam .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. Shrikant Patil, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.R. Kale, AGP for the State. wp6295.09 2 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7149 OF 2009 Kirtimantrao s/o Pitambarrao Kauthalkar .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. H.D. Patil, advocate holding for Mr. P.B. Patil, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.R. Kale, AGP for the State. Mr. S.T. Shelke, advocate for respondent nos. 2 to 4. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8812 OF 2009 Subhash Kalu Patil .. PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others .. RESPONDENTS Mr. S.R. Patil, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.R. Kale, AGP for the State. ===== CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE & R.M. BORDE, JJ. DATE : 22 nd FEBRUARY, 2011 PER COURT : wp6295.09 3 . In these writ petitions, the petitioner have challenged the orders of their termination, issued by respondent nos. 2 and 3. Learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 to 4 submits that after filing of this writ petition, respondent nos. 2 and 3 have withdrawn the orders of termination. He has placed on record the orders by which the earlier orders of termination are withdrawn. The orders of withdrawal of termination are taken on record. In view thereof, he submits that nothing survives in these petitions. He further submits that after withdrawal of the orders of termination, all the petitioners resumed their duties and they are working regularly. 2 In the circumstances, these four writ petitions are disposed of as infructuous. ( R. M. BORDE ) ( D.B. BHOSALE ) JUDGE JUDGE dyb