1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10231 of 2009 Mr. Kiran Daji Sawant & ors. ....Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ....Respondents Mr. N.V. Bandiwadekar, advocate for petitioner. Mr. S.R.Nargolkar-GP for respondents 1, 4 & 7. Mr. R.Z. Moray with Mr. Amit Sale, advocate for respondents 5, 5A. Ms. Pooja Thorat for respondent no.6. CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND R.M.SAVANT, JJ DATED:- March 29, 2010 P.C. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Ostensibly, the Petitioners are challenging the Report dated 8th September, 2009 but the attempt is to pre-empt statutory remedy of Appeal available to the Petitioners against the proposed order of termination. The fact that the action of termination would be based on the Report under challenge does not take the matter any further for the Petitioners. In as much as the correctness of the basis on which the order of termination is founded will have to be decided in the Appeal proceedings, if so challenged. All questions that have been raised in the present Petition can be effectively answered in the said 2 Appeal proceedings. For that reason, we decline to exercise our writ jurisdiction. Instead, leave the option available to the Petitioners to resort to remedy of Appeal under Section 9 of the Act against the order of termination, if so advised. All questions in the said proceedings will have to be decided on its own merits in accordance with law. 3. Petition disposed of accordingly. (R.M. SAVANT, J) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J)