1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.5778 OF 2007. Lakhanlal Ramlal Dhuare ..vs.. The Education Officer (Sec.) Z.P.Gondia =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Office Notes, office Memoranda of Coram Court's or Judge's appearances, Court's orders or directions order and Registrar's order. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= CORAM: ANOOP V.MOHTA and C.L.PANGARKAR,JJ. DATE : 11th JULY, 2008. 1. Heard Shri I.N.Choudhari, Advocate for the petitioner and Shri P.D.Kothari, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent no.1. None for respondents two and three. 2. After considering the reply filed by respondent no.1 which shows inaction on the part of the respondent-Management, who though served not appeared before this court, by not sending the proposal/objection as referred in impugned letter dated 9/9/2004. In reply filed by respondent no.1, the averements in para no.2 are thus - 2 “That the respondent no.3 sent proposal in respect of appointment of the petitioner vide letter dated 16.8.2004, however, the approved copy of the roster register, caste validity certificate were not sent to the answering respondent and joining letter of the petitioner signed along with the proposal were old and for this reason the answering respondent by letter dated 9.9.2004 rejected the proposal of the approval of the appointment of petitioner. At the same time it was informed to the respondent no.2 that the management will be responsible for making payment of salary of the petitioner. Since the petitioner is appointed by respondent no.2, itself it responsible for making payment to the petitioner.” In view of this, it is necessary for the respondent- Management to send documents as required and referred in reply para no.2 above. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE. 3 chute