-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.981 OF 2003 Mrs.Madhavi R. Narsalay : Petitioner V/s. University of Mumbai & Ors. : Respondents ... Mr.Santosh Shetty with Mr.M.M.Vashi for the petitioner. Mr.Rui Rodrigues for respondent No.1. Mr.M.D.Naik, Asstt. Govt. Pleader, for respondent No.2. Mr.S. Mahadeshwar for respondent No.3. ... CORAM : H.L.GOKHALE & S.R.DONGAONKAR,JJ. DATE : MARCH 24, 2006. P.C. 1. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and respondent Nos.1 and 3 have tendered Minutes of Order initialled by them and they seek an order in terms thereof. In view of the development which has taken place subsequent to the filing of the petition, the Minutes have come along whereunder the claim of the petitioner is satisfied and the interest of respondent No.3 is also protected. In view thereof, there will be an order in terms of the Minutes and the petition will stand disposed of in terms thereof. -: 2 :- 2. Mr.Naik, learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader, appears for respondent No.2 State of Maharashtra. He states that he does not have any instructions and, therefore, he has not signed the Minutes. As far as the State Government is concerned, all that is expected in the Minutes is that the State is directed to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner and respondent No.3. In our view, there should be no difficulty in that, inasmuch as respondent No.3 was being appointed on a seat meant for reserved category candidate and that purpose is being served without affecting the petitioner, in any manner, whatsoever. There will not be any financial burden on the State as well. We expect the State to issue necessary approval to the University, at the earliest. 3. Petition stands disposed of. H.L. GOKHALE, J. S.R.DONGAONKAR, J.