Mgn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.198 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APLICATION STAMP NO.10644 OF 2010 Nivrutti Barku Bahikar ..Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents And Shri Sayaji Tukaram Patil & Ors. ..Applicants Mr. B.Walimbe i/b. Smt. Preeti Walimbe, for the Petitioners. Mr. N.P. Deshpande, AGP for respondent No.1. Mr. S.S. Deshmukh, for respondent No.2. Mr. P.P. Chavan i/b. N.S. Dhumal for respondent No.3. Mr. Kiran Bapat i/b.Desai & Desai Associates for Applicant in C.A. St. 10644 of 2010. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 5th May, 2010 P.C. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 28th April, 2010 the State Government has issued the Notification constituting the Board. In the light of that in so far as that aspect is concerned nothing further survives. 2. In so far as prayer (a) is concerned it will not be possible for this Court to issue any direction to terminate the services of respondent No.3 from the office of Welfare Commissioner. A charge sheet has already been issued against the respondent No.3. The Appointing Authority if it comes to the conclusion as a Disciplinary Authority that there is any misconduct on the part of Respondent No.3 would be bound to take steps according to law by following due procedure. 3. In so far as prayer (b) is concerned, an application for intervention was moved on behalf of five employees whose matter is pending before the Industrial Court. Learned Counsel contends that initial report prepared does not indicate that appointments of the candidates was contrary to law. At the highest it is pointed out that it would show that there are some candidates who are related and where whose appointment may be tainted. We do not propose to go into that controversy as show cause notices have been issued against which those employees have filed a complaint of Unfair Labour Practice which is pending now in Revision before the Industrial Court. We have already issued direction to the Industrial Court. We, however, make it clear that the Industrial Court will proceed to dispose of the matter according to law. This Court has not yet pronounced on the merits of the matter. Considering that after disposal of the Revision it is for the Competent Authority to act according to law. In the light of the above, nothing further survives in this petition, which is accordingly disposed off. 4. In view of the disposal of the main Petition nothing survives in the Civil Application. Civil Application disposed off as infructuous. (A.A. SAYED, J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)