srk 1 pil-64-10.sxw THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.64 OF 2010 Shri Sameer Iqbalahmed Jamadar and another. ... Petitioners Versus Shri Venkteshwara Magasvargiya Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd. and others. ... Respondents Mr.P.C. Kansara for the petitioners. Mr. Prashant P. Kulkarni for respondent Nos.7 and 19. Mr. R.P. Behere, Additional Government Pleader for respondent Nos.72 and 74. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. Thursday, January 20, 2011 P.C. The grievance in this petition filed in March, 2010 was that the funds made available by the State Government to the respondent-society were not utilized for the purpose for which the financial assistance was granted by the State Government. 2. Affidavit-in-reply has been filed by Mr. Uttam Shivram Lonare, Deputy Secretary to the Government, Social Justice and Special Assistance Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai on 8th January, 2011. It is stated in the affidavit that the Government had sanctioned the financial assistance to respondent Nos.1 to 48 in accordance with the conditions indicated in the Government Resolution dated 22nd May, 2008 and Corrigendum dated 30th March, 2010. It is stated that there were some lacunae in the procedure prescribed by the Government Resolution dated 22nd May, 2008 and, srk 2 pil-64-10.sxw therefore, the State Government issued Corrigendum dated 30th March, 2010 to remove those lacunae and some additional conditions have accordingly been imposed. It is further stated that the proposals of some of the respondents- societies, as mentioned in para 5 of the affidavit, are consideration of the respondents and the amounts have not been deposited in the joint account of those societies and the Director of Social Welfare Department. It is further indicated that even after the amounts are sanctioned, they are not disbursed straightaway to the concerned societies but they are deposited in the joint account of the concerned societies and Social Welfare Department and only after the necessary documents have submitted, the amounts are disbursed from such joint account. 3. In view of the above, we are of the view that petition is not required to be kept pending any further and the proceedings are accordingly, closed. CHIEF JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, J.