1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2447/2010 (BHARTI VINOD GAHANE VERSUS BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., MUMBAI & ANR) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri B.N. Jaipurkar, counsel for the petitioner Shri N.W. Sambre, counsel for the R-2. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : JULY 18 , 2011 . Shri Sambre, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2, states that the writ petition should not be entertained as the petitioner has not exhausted the alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the appropriate authority. Shri Jaipurkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is ready to avail the alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the appropriate authority as stated in paragraph 3 of the reply. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file an appeal before the appropriate authority. Permission and liberty is granted to the petitioner, as prayed for. The writ petition is disposed of as withdrawn. JUDGE JUDGE APTE