- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2930/2009 Santosh Gangadhar Satpute. ...Petitioner.. Versus Union of India & others. ...Respondents... ..... Shri P.V. Tapse Patil, Advocate for petitioner. Shri Alok Sharma, Standing Counsel for Union of India. Shri V.H. Dighe, AGP for respondent nos.5 & 6. ..... CORAM: V.C.DAGA & A.V. POTDAR,JJ. DATE: 14.07.2009 PER COURT: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is claiming that his representation made to the authorities, reproduced at page 37 of the petition, be decided. On being asked, the learned counsel appearing for the Union of India submits that the - 2 - petitioner did not report after 10.4.2006 i.e. after expiry of the leave period. Thereafter, departmental inquiry was initiated against him and punishment of removal has been imposed. All these facts are not mentioned in the petition. The petition suffers from suppression of facts. The petition is dismissed with costs quantified in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand only). (A.V. Potdar,J.) (V.C. Daga, J.) ndk/c14709