1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.1755 OF 2008 Rani S. Kalyani. ...Petitioner. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr.Saikumar Ramamurthy for the Petitioner. Mr. J.S. Chandanani for Respondent Nos.2 to 3. Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 4. ..... CORAM :DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. June 27, 2008. P.C.: At the hearing of the petition, Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Counsel appearing on behalf of the Second and Third Respondents are agreed that it would be appropriate if the impugned order is quashed and set aside and the proceedings are remitted back to the Additional School Tribunal, Navi Mumbai for fresh decision on the Execution Application. From the impugned order it emerges that at the hearing of the application taken out by the 2 Petitioner, the Learned Advocate for the Petitioner was absent. In paragraph 23 of the petition it has been stated that the Petitioner was absent since she was on maternity leave. The Tribunal heard the arguments of the Petitioner's spouse and thereupon proceeded to dismiss the petition. There is merit in the submission which has been urged that it was inappropriate for the Tribunal to dismiss the application merely by hearing the Petitioner's spouse and which is likely to cause miscarriage of justice. In view of the aforesaid statement, without the expression of any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions of the parties, the impugned order dated 15th January 2007 is set aside. The School Tribunal is directed to pass fresh order on the application for execution after furnishing an opportunity to the parties of being heard. The parties shall appear before the School Tribunal for receiving directions on 19th July 2008 in order to enable the Tribunal to set down a time schedule for expeditious disposal of the application. All the rights and contentions of the parties are kept open. The petition is disposed of. .....