1 wp1312-11.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ttm WRIT PETITION NO.1312 OF 2011 D.C.Pandey .. Petitioner Vs. Union of India and Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Arshad Shaikh with Mr.Sanjay Udeshi and Ms.Vaishali Hundlekar for the petitioner Mr.T.J.Pandian for respondent nos.1 to 3 CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE & K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 9TH NOVEMBER, 2011. P.C. 1. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has instructions to withdraw the Writ Petition in view of the fact that presently respondent no.2, Mr.B.S.Sidhu, is not holding the charge of Chief Security Commissioner. He further submits that the petitioner has already filed statutory appeal under Rule 212 of the RPF Central Railway, CST, Mumbai challenging the order of the punishment of Compulsory Retirement. He seeks direction to the Appellate Authority to consider and decide this appeal on merits in accordance with law and without entering into an issue of limitation. 2 wp1312-11.doc 2. The learned counsel for the respondents has no objection for allowing the petitioner to withdraw this writ petition. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, we are satisfied that the following order shall meet the ends of justice: a) Petition is disposed of as withdrawn. b) The appellate authority shall consider and decide the appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Authority shall decide the appeal without entering into the issue of limitation. All contention of the parties are kept open. (K.K. TATED, J.) (D.B. BHOSALE, J.)