((-1-)) mst IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO.286 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO.722 OF 2008 Avisha Gopalkrishnan & others Petitioners versus Vibgyor High School & others Respondents Mr.J.P.Cama, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Mihir Desai for petitioners. Mr.Janak Dwarkadas, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Snehal Shah with Mr.V.Manar i/by Viraj A. Maniar Associates for R-1. Mr.Aspi Chinoy, Sr.Counsel with Mr.D.D.Madon, Sr.Counsel and Mr.Pratik Sexeria i/by Nivit Srivastava for R-2. Mrs.Madhubala Kajale, AGP for R.3 and 4. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND A.A.KUMBHAKONI, JJ. DATE : 16th October 2008 PC : 1. This was a motion taken out by respondent no.1 contending that the orders of Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 5th May 2008 have not been complied with by the parents. By that order, both, the management as well as parents were asked to file undertakings. The management has filed an undertaking. Similarly, one of the ((-2-)) petitioners has filed an undertaking on behalf of other petitioners. 2. However, the order of Supreme Court is a direction to the parents to file the undertakings. In other words, each and every parent would have to file an undertaking. In case, if parents has more than one child, a single undertaking covering all the children will suffice. Respondent no.1 to make available to the petitioners’ advocate on record the names, addresses as also telephone numbers and e-mail addresses within one week from today. The undertakings by all the parents should be filed on or before 19th November 2008. 3. We make it clear that only those parents who file undertakings, will be covered by the orders of Supreme Court. In respect of those parents who do not file undertaking, it will be open to the management to take appropriate action as may be warranted. Place the matter on board on 24th November 2008. Notice of Motion disposed off accordingly. (A.A.KUMBHAKONI, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) ((-3-)) ((-4-)) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION CHAMBER SUMMONS NO.185 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO.722 OF 2008 Avisha Gopalkrishnan & others Petitioners versus Vibgyor High School & others Respondents Mr.J.P.Cama, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Mihir Desai for petitioners. Mr.Janak Dwarkadas, Sr.Counsel with Mr.Snehal Shah with Mr.V.Manar i/by Viraj A. Maniar Associates for R-1. Mr.Aspi Chinoy, Sr.Counsel with Mr.D.D.Madon, Sr.Counsel and Mr.Pratik Sexeria i/by Nivit Srivastava for R-2. Mrs.Madhubala Kajale, AGP for R.3 and 4. CORAM : F.I.REBELLO AND A.A.KUMBHAKONI, JJ. DATE : 16th October 2008 PC : 1. Present Chamber Summons is filed by respondent no.1. Respondent no.1 has prayed to strike out the amended portion incorporated by the petitioner in the petition. On behalf of the petitioners learned counsel draws our attention to the order dated 7th April 2008 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.722 of 2008 where an oral plea on behalf of the ((-5-)) counsel for the petitioners was allowed seeking leave to amend the petition. It is, however, pointed out that it was only to bring other documents on record. But what the petitioner has done is apart from bringing on record those documents, added prayer clauses and grounds. 2. We have heard parties. Learned counsel for respondent no.1 technically may be right that the order of amendment permitted by this Court was not to introduce pleadings or prayer clauses. However, considering the nature of pleadings and prayer clauses incorporated, in our opinion, and after hearing the parties, the said amendment and prayer clauses would not alter and change the nature of petition. 3. The other grievance of the respondent no.1 is that the petitioners themselves had prayed that Auditors be appointed. In fact, audit has already been done and as such it is not open for them by the prayer clause to seek quashing of audit report. In our opinion, this can be an issue which will be considered on merits of the matter at the time of final hearing of this petition. ((-6-)) 4. Yet another grievance of respondent no.1 is that during pendency of this petition before this Court, the petitioners moved the Minister for Education for withdrawing the audit reports which are the subject matter of prayer clauses (c-1) and (c-2). On behalf of petitioners, the learned counsel on taking instructions makes a statement that they are not pressing the complaint before the Minister and they will inform the Minister accordingly. The statement is accepted. 5. Considering the above, the Chamber Summons as filed stands disposed off. (A.A.KUMBHAKONI, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)