1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 1195 OF 2008 Dist.: SOLAPUR Seth Govindji Raoji Ayurved Mahavidyalaya, Solapur, and Anr. ...Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. G.S. Godbole for the petitioners Mr. C.R. Sonawane, Assistant Government Pleader, for Respondents No. 1, 3 and 4 Mr. R.V. Govilkar for Respondents No. 2 and 5. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE: JUNE 19, 2008 P. C.:- The petition can be disposed of at this stage with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, as pleadings are complete. 2. There are no disputes with regard to facts. The petitioners have filed Writ Petition challenging an order passed by the University on 11th January, 2008, directing the petitioner-institution not to admit new students on the ground that two earlier Resolutions passed by the 2 Management Council of the University were not implemented by the petitioner-institution. These Council Resolutions were Resolution No. 50/2007 dated 16th June, 2007 and Resolution No. 93/2007 (E) dated 6th October, 2007. It appears that the Management had dismissed two teachers, and their dismissal was reversed by the Management Council by the above-mentioned two Resolutions; and the grievance of the University was that since they were not reinstated, therefore, the impugned order was passed. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Resolutions, reinstating the dismissed employees, were challenged successfully in High Court Writ Petition No. 501 and 505 of 2008, which fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondents. 3. As the basis for passing the impugned order no longer exists, therefore, the impugned order cannot be sustained. For these reasons, we allow the Writ Petition, and quash the impugned order. BILAL NAZKI, J. S.S. SHINDE, J.