All Cases

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 …. Kunal Sunil Hargude ...Applicant Versus State Of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr. Rahul Kadam, Advocate for the Applicant. Ms. P. N. Dabholkar, APP for the Respondent – State. Mr. A. A. Khatavkar, PSI Shikrapur Police Station present. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : th 12 October, 2022. PER COURT : Heard both sides. Stand over to 19th October, 2022. 'for passing order'. Till then the applicant shall not be arrested. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.)

Order - Status 6: 11.ABA.2821.2022.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Rahul S. Kadam, Advocate for applicant. MsP.N.Dabholkar, APP, for State. Mr.Tejas S. Pawar, Advocate for complainant. API V.S.Pawar, Shikrapur Police Station, present. CORAM : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. DATE : 19th October 2022 PC : Learned Advocate Mr.T.S.Pawar submitted that he has instructions to appear for the complainant. He undertakes to file his vakalatnama. He is permitted to appear for complainant in this application. Copy of application be served upon him by advocate for applicant. Stand over to 14th November 2022. Interim relief to continue. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) MST

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude ....APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra ....RESPONDENT WITH CRI-INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3722 OF 2022 In Cr. Anticipatory Bail Appln. 2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....RESPONDENT Mr. Adhik Kadam i/by Mr. Rahul Kadam for Applicant Mr. A. A. Palkar APP for State CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANDEEP KASHINATH SHINDE J DATE : 14th November, 2022 P.C. : Not before the Bench of which Justice Sandeep K. Shinde is a member. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and another … Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent AND ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3722 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and another … Respondents …...... …...... Mr. Ashish Vernekar for the Applicants in ABA-3496-2022. Mr. Rahul Kadam for the applicant in ABA-2821-2022. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad Patil, APP for the State. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 13 FEBRUARY 2023 P.C. :- The learned Counsel for the parties submits that the settlement talks are going on. In view thereof, stand over to 3 March 2023. Interim order to continue till next date. ( N.R. BORKAR, J. ) KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Digitally signed by KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Date: 2023.02.13 18:44:52 +0530 Kanchan P Dhuri 1 / 1

Order - Status 13: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and another … Applicants Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent AND ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3722 OF 2022 …...... …...... Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Ashish Vernekar for the Applicants in ABA-3496-2022. Mr. Rahul Kadam for the Applicant in ABA-2821-2022. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad Patil, APP for the State. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 3 MARCH 2023 P.C. :- At the request of the learned Counsel for the Applicants, stand over to 21 March 2023. Interim order to continue till next date. ( N.R. BORKAR, J. ) KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Digitally signed by KANCHAN PRASHANT DHURI Date: 2023.03.04 10:25:56 +0530 Kanchan P Dhuri 1 / 1

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and anr … Applicants Versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant Versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3722 OF 2022 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude … Intervenor In the matter between Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant Versus ~ ~ State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr.Satyavrat Joshi a/w Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar for the Applicant in ABA/3496/2022. …...... Mr. Rahul S. Kadam for the Applicant in ABA/2821/2022. Mr. P.H. Gaikwad Patil, APP for the Respondent – State. Ravikiran Mohan Jadhav, PH 2229, Shikrapur Police Station, Pune, present. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATED : 21 MARCH 2023 P.C. :- At the request of learned counsel for the Applicant, stand over to 12th April, 2023. Ad-interim relief, if any, granted earlier to continue till the next date. ( N.R. BORKAR, J. )

Order - Status 17: 7-aba-3496-22 @ G.doc DINESH SADANAND SHERLA Digitally signed by DINESH SADANAND SHERLA Date: 2023.04.12 14:07:00 +0500 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil N. Hargude and anr. …Applicants V/s. State of Maharashtra & anr. ...Respondents. WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 Kunal S. Hargude …Applicant V/s. State of Maharashtra ...Respondent. WITH CONNECTED INTERIM APPLICATION Mr. Satyavrat Joshi a/w. Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar for the Applicants in ABA 3496/22. Mr. Rahul S. Kadam for the Applicant in ABA 2821/22. Mrs.Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the Respondent/State. Mr. Tejas S. Pawar for the Intervenor. CORAM : N.R. BORKAR, J. DATE : 12.04.2023. P.C. : List on 13 June 2023. The interim order, if any, to continue till the next date. [N.R.BORKAR, J.]

Order - Status 19: VRJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude & Anr. … Applicants V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. … Respondents WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3722 OF 2022 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude … Applicant the matter between In Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant V/s. The State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar for the applicant in ABA/3496/2022. Mr. Rahul S. Kadam for the applicant in ABA/2821/2022. Mr. Tejas S. Pawar for the applicnat in IA/3722/2022. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : JUNE 13, 2023 P.C.: 1. Stand over to 4 th July 2023. Ad-interim relief granted earlier to continue till 4th July 2023. (AMIT BORKAR, J.)

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude And Anr APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT WITH CR. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLN. NO. 2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude APPLICANT V/S State Of Maharashtra RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE AMIT BORKAR J DATE : 25th July, 2023 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 10/08/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 25: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and anr. ...Applicants vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent WITH CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent WITH CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3722 OF 2022 IN CRIMINAL ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude ...Applicant In the matter between : Kunal Sunil Hargude ...Applicant vs. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent Mr.Samay Pawar i/b. Mr. Ashish Vernekar for the Applicant in ABA . Mrs. Geeta P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent-State. API V. S. Pawar, Shikrapur Police Station, Pune, present. CORAM : N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATED : 24 AUGUST 2023 P. C. : At the request of learned counsel for the applicant, stand over to 13 September 2023. Interim order, granted earlier, shall continue to operate till next date. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

Order - Status 29: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3496 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude and Anr. … Applicants versus State of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant versus State Of Maharashtra … Respondent WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.3722 OF 2022 IN ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2022 Sunil Namdev Hargude … Applicant and Kunal Sunil Hargude … Applicant versus State Of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Samay Pawar i/by Mr. Ashish S. Vernekar, for Applicants in ABA 3496 of 2022. Mr. Rahul S. Kadam, for Applicant in ABA 2821 of 2022. Mr. M.G.Patil, APP for State. Mr. Amol Anil Khatavkar, PSI Shikrapur Police Station present. CORAM: N.J.JAMADAR, J. DATE : 9 OCTOBER 2023 P.C. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2821 OF 2021 This is an application for pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R.No.803 of 2022 registered with Shikrapur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 465, 467, 471 of IPC. 3**.** The Applicant Kunal is the son of Applicant No.1 Sunil in ABA No.3496 of 2022. Applicant No.2 Ganesh is the brother of Applicant No.1 Sunil and uncle of Kunal. The first informant Sunil had lodged a report against Kunal with the allegations that his relations with his wife Dwarka have been strained. Dwarka and Kunal are residing separetely. Disputes arose over the ancestral properties. A civil suit is instituted by Kunal in the Court at Shirur. Namdev, the father of Sunil and Ganesh and grand-father of Kunal was bed-ridden. Namdev passed away on 14 April 2022. The first informant alleged that after the death of Namdev, it transpired that the applicant had obtained a Power of Attorney and Agreement for sale by setting up an imposter. On the basis of the said forged documents, the applicant also got executed the sale deed in his name. After realizing the fraud, the first informant lodged the report. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.3496 OF 2022 This is an application for pre-arrest bail in connection with C.R.No.1004 of 2022 registered with Shikrapur Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 324, 341, 504, 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and Section 3 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959. Subsequently, Section 307 of the IPC came to be added. Kunal lodged a report with the allegations that on 9 November 2022 while he was passing from behind John Dear Factory on Talegaon Dhamdhere to Sanaswadi Road, a car intercepted him. Three persons alighted from the said car and they boarded the first informant's car. One of those persons was armed with a knife like sharp weapon. The first informant was assaulted on his right hand. One of the assailants pointed a pistol at the neck of the first informant and threatened to shoot him if he did not return the lands to his father and uncle. The assailants declared that they were sent by the applicants – Sunil and Ganesh. Initially this Court has granted interim protection in both the matters. The learned Counsel for the Applicant in ABA 2821 of 2022 submits that the applicants have amicably resolved the disputes and the applicant – Kunal has filed an application for quashing of the prosecution. The learned Counsel for the Applicants in ABA 3496 of 2022 also submits that in view of the settlement, those applicants are also in the process of filing an application for quashing the prosecution. Evidently, the genesis of the offences is in the dispute between the father and son over the ancestral properties. It appears that a suit was instituted by the applicant – Kunal during the lifetime of his grand-father. The allegations of forgery and using the forged documents for the purpose of cheating revolve around documents. At this length of time, the custodial interrogation of the applicants does not seem to be warranted. I am, therefore, inclined to exercise discretion in favour of the applicants. Hence, the following order : ORDER ABA NO.2821 OF 2022 (i) In the event of the arrest of the Applicant – Kunal Sunil Hargude in connection with C.R.No.803 of 2022 registered with Shikrapur Police Station, the Applicant be released on bail on furnishing a PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. (ii) The Applicant shall co-operate with the investigation and report to Shikrapur Police Station on 16th, 17th and 18 October 2023 in between 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. (iii) The Applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and/or give threat or inducement to the first informant or any of the prosecution witnesses or any of the persons acquainted with the facts of the case. (iv) The Applicant shall produce all the original documents which are in his SSP 4/6 custody before the Investigating Officer. (v) The Applicant shall also submit his specimen handwriting and signature to the Investigating Officer. (vi) The Applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court. ABA NO.3496 OF 2022 (vii) In the event of the arrest of the applicants – Sunil Namdev Hargude and Ganesh Namdev Hargude in connection with C.R.No.1004 of 2022 registered with Shikrapur Police Station, they be released on bail on furnishing a PR bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each with one or two sureties in the like amount. (viii) The Applicants shall co-operate with the investigation and report to Shikrapur Police Station on 19th, 20th and 21st October 2023 in between 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 p.m. (ix) The Applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and/or give threat or inducement to the first informant or any of the prosecution witnesses or any of the persons acquainted with the facts of the case. (x) The Applicants shall regularly attend the proceedings before the jurisdictional Court. (xi) The applications stand disposed. (xii) The Interim application also stands disposed. (xiii) It is clarified that these prima facie observations are confined to determine entitlement to pre-arrest bail only. ( N.J.JAMADAR, J. )

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1264 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1546 OF 2010 M.C.G.M. ..Applicant v/s. Ganga Timappa & Ors. ..Respondents ALONGWITH CAF/1265/2018 IN FA/1547/2010 CAF/1266/2018 IN FA/1548/2010 CAF/1267/2018 IN FA/1549/2010 CAF/1268/2018 IN FA/1550/2010 CAF/1269/2018 IN FA/1551/2010 CAF/1270/2018 IN FA/1552/2010 CAF/1271/2018 IN FA/1553/2010 CAF/1272/2018 IN FA/1554/2010 CAF/1273/2018 IN FA/1555/2010 CAF/1274/2018 IN FA/1556/2010 CAF/1275/2018 IN FA/1557/2010 CAF/1276/2018 IN FA/1558/2010 CAF/1277/2018 IN FA/1559/2010 CAF/1278/2018 IN FA/1560/2010 CAF/1279/2018 IN FA/1561/2010 CAF/1292/2018 IN FA/1562/2010 Mr. N.V.Walawalkar, Sr. Adv. a/w. Madhuri More for the Applicant-BMC.. CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : 02 APRIL, 2018. P.C. Not on board. On production, taken on board. Interim relief granted by earlier Order dated 8th February, 2018 to continue till the next date of hearing. Stand over to 11th June, 2018. (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.)

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1264 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1546 OF 2010 The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay … Applicant V/s. Ganga Timmappa & Anr. … Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1265 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1547 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1266 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1548 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1267 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1549 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1268 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1550 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1269 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1551 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1270 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1552 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1271 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1553 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1272 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1554 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1273 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1555 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1274 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1556 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1275 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1557 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1276 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1558 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1277 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1559 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1278 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1560 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1279 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1561 OF 2010 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1292 OF 2018 IN FIRST APPEAL NO. 1562 OF 2010 Mr.N.V. Walawalkar, Senior Advocate a/w. Ms.M.R. Bhoir for the Applicant. Ms.Megha S. Bajoria i/b. Mr.Kuldeep S. Patil for Respondent No.2. CORAM : DR.SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J. DATE : 8th JUNE, 2018. P.C. : 1] All these 17 Civil Applications are filed for condonation of delay of 44 days in taking out the present application for restoration against Respondent No.1. 2] It is submitted that the notice of this application could not be served by regular mode on Respondent No.1, as the structure is demolished and Respondent No.1 has re-shifted his residence and therefore, the permission is sought to serve the notice by way of substituted service by publication thereof in one English as well as one Marathi newspaper namely "Free Press Journal" and "Navshakti" or such other papers as this Court deem fit. 3] Considering the ground made of non service of Respondent No.1 by regular mode, these Applications are allowed in terms of prayer Clause (b) for service of notice on Respondent No.1 by publication in the local newspapers having circulation in the area of Mumbai. 4] Accordingly, the order of ad-interim relief, which is granted by this Court on 2nd April, 2018 and which was continued till 3/4 11th June, 2018 is directed to be continued till 16th August, 2018, in view of the issuance of the notice to Respondent No.1. 5] It is clarified that the matter is adjourned for return of the notice to 7th August, 2018 and the order of ad-interim relief, granted earlier, is extended till 16th August, 2018. 6] Stand over to 7th August, 2018. [DR.SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.]

Order - Status 14: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8650 OF 2003 Union of India & Ors. ...... Petitioners. v/s Chandrabhan R. Shinde & Anr. ...... Respondents. Mr. Y.S. Bhate with Mr. N.R. Prajapati i/b Mr. K.B. Rao for the Petitioners. Mr. Saikumar Ramamurthy for respondent No.1. ----- CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & V.M. KANADE, JJ. DATE : 24th March, 2008. P.C.: By this Petition, the Petitioner - Union of India is challenging the judgment and order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.734 of 2001 whereby the application filed by respondent No.1 is allowed and the order dated 17/09/2001 which was passed by the Petitioner was quashed and set aside and it was held that the applicant/respondent No.1 was entitled to receive pension in view of revision of pension by the Vth Pay Commission. Brief facts in nutshell are as under:- The respondent No.1, initially, was working as Labour Officer in Western Railway with effect from 24/10/1952 to 20/09/1963. Thereafter, he worked as Labour Officer under the Chief Labour Officer and as Assistant Labour Officer from 1963 to 1979 and, thereafter, he joined the International Airport Authority which is a Public Sector Undertaking and came to be absorbed therein with effect from 02/04/1979. Some time in February, 1984 the respondent No.1 was sanctioned pro-rata pension of Rs 297/- per month by the Ministry of Labour with effect from 02/04/1979. Initially, the applicant opted to commute 1/3rd of his pension in February, 1984 i.e. Rs 99/- out of Rs 297 and received an amount of Rs, 14,671.80. On 24/03/1984, he again opted to commute balance 2/3rd of the monthly pension i.e. Rs 198/- and received Rs 29,343.60. Respondent No.1's services in Western Railway, however, were allowed to be counted for the purpose of pension and, consequently, pension was revised to Rs 498/- with effect from 02/04/1979 vide order dated 02/07/1985. Thereafter, in view of the IVth Pay Commission his pension was again revised with effect from 01/01/1986 to Rs 1138/- deducting Rs 297/- which he had commuted in 1984. After the Vth Pay Commission, the respondent No.1's pension was further directed to be revised vide order dated 29/07/1999 and it was revised to Rs 3,443/-. However the respondent No.1's pension was suddenly stopped by the order dated 04/10/2000 and, 2 therefore, he filed Original Application No.861 of 2000. The said Original Application was allowed by order dated 19/03/2001 and a direction was given to the petitioner to issue notice to the respondent No.1 and, thereafter, take a decision. Accordingly a fresh notice was issued to the respondent No.1. The respondent No.1 filed his representation and, thereafter, the impugned order was passed against the petitioner. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner - Union of India submitted that the Tribunal had clearly erred in passing the impugned order. He submitted that the respondent No.1 having commuted his entire pension on 24/03/1984 was not entitled to get the revised pension. He invited our attention to Rule 6 of Central Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 and also Rule 10 of the said Rules. The submission made by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner cannot be accepted. It is apparent that what was commuted by the respondent No.1 was pension to the tune of Rs 297/- only and not the entire pension of Rs 498/-. The Tribunal has reproduced the application dated 24/03/1984 and on the basis of this application, the Tribunal has recorded a finding that the respondent No.1 never had any intention of commuting the revised pension of Rs 498/- per month. In our view, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. The 3 Tribunal, after having considered the relevant rules and the facts of the case, has recorded a finding in favour of respondent No.1. It is a well settled position in law that while exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution, the High Court is not entitled to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal of competent jurisdiction even if a wrong finding is given. In the present case, we are of the view that the finding recorded by the Tribunal has to be confirmed in view of the admitted position that the respondent No.1 had commuted total amount of Rs 297/- out of the revised pension of Rs 498/- per month and, as such, the respondent No.1 was entitled to the revision made by IVth Pay Commission and Vth Pay Commission on the said balance amount and the impugned order passed by the Petitioner - Union of India was, therefore, rightly set aside by the Tribunal. Hence, there is no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal. Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Under the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. (D.K. DESHMUKH, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 243 OF 2015 Samayadurai K. Agamudian. ..Petitioner. Versus The Hon'ble Chief Minister, Government of Maharashtra and Others. ..Respondents. Mr. S. G. Kudale for the Petitioner. Mr. F. R. Shaikh, learned APP for the State. Mr. S. G. Surana for Respondent No. 5. Mr. Mahesh Vaswani, Mr. Javed Gheewala, Dharini Nagda, Anushree Kulkarni for Respondent No. 6 and 7. Coram : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. Date : February 2, 2015 . P. C. : Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner seeks leave to amend the prayer clause. Leave granted. Necessary amendment be carried out within a week. Place the writ petition for admission on 16th February 2015. [SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 243 OF 2015 Samayadurai K. Agamudian. ..Petitioner. Versus The Hon'ble Chief Minister, Government of Maharashtra & Others. ..Respondents. Mr. S. G. Kudale for the Petitioner. Mr. S. G. Suvarna for Respondent No. 5. Mr. U. V. Kejriwal, learned APP for the State. Coram : RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. Date : March 17, 2015 . P. C. : By the order dated 2nd February 2015, we granted leave to the Petitioner to amend the prayer clause. The Petitioner, however, not only amended the prayer clause but has also inserted paragraph No.11a to 11j in the main petition without seeking leave of the Court. Besides, the Petitioner without leave of the Court, has annexed Exhibit-F to N. Registry is directed to submit explanation in what circumstances, the Petitioner was allowed to carry out amendment by introducing paragraph 11a to 11j and annexe Exhibit-F to N, without leave of the Court to that effect. [SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 243 OF 2015 Samayadurai K. Agamudian .. Petitioner v/s. The Hon'ble Chief Minister, Government of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. S.G. Kudle for the petitioner Mr. S.G. Suvarna for respondent no.5 Ms. Dharini Nagda i/b Javeed Mohd. Gaus Gheewala for respondent nos. 6 and 7 CORAM: RANJIT MORE & SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. DATED: 31st MARCH, 2015. P.C. We have gone through the explanation offered by Mrs. Mali, Section Officer. We accept the explanation, however, Section Officer is directed to be more cautious in future. Mr. Kudale, learned Counsel for the petitioner has carried out amendment contrary to the order dated 02.02.2015 hence, the paragraphs, which are inserted contrary to the order of amendment, shall be removed. Stand over to 6th April, 2015. (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) ( RANJIT MORE, J.)

Order - Status 19: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.243 OF 2015 Samayadurai K. Agamudian ..Petitioner. V/s. The Hon'ble Chief Minister, Government of Maharashtra and Ors. ..Respondents. Mr.S.G.Kudle for the petitioner. Mrs.U.V.kejriwal, APP for respondent-State. Mr.M.S.Surana for respondent No.5. Mr.Mahesh Vaswani i/b. Mr.Javeed Mohd. Gaus Gheewala for respondent Nos.6 and 7. CORAM : RANJIT MORE AND V.L.ACHLIYA, JJ. DATED : 17TH DECEMBER, 2015 P.C. :- Heard learned counsel for the parties. At the outset, Mr.Kudle, learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his petition to the relief claimed in prayer (c). Statement is accepted. Mr.Kudale in this regard relies upon his application dated 29th November, 2013 (annexed at Exhibit-L, page 80 of the petition) seeking police protection, which is pending since last two years. Learned APP having taken instructions states that said application will be decided by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Protection Branch), Mumbai as expeditiously as possible. In the above circumstances, we direct the Deputy Commissioner (Protection Branch), Mumbai to dispose of the petitioner's application within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order. Order accordingly. Petition is disposed of accordingly. (V.L.ACHLIYA, J.) ( RANJIT MORE, J.)

Order - Status 2: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO. 15157 OF 2018 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (ST) NO. 15158 OF 2018 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER (ST) NO. 15157 OF 2018 Mrs. Lata W/o. Hemant Garg .. Appellant/Orig.Plaintiffs Vs. Nehru Nagar Sukhsagar CHS Ltd. & Anr ..Respondent/Orig. Def. CORAM : K.K. SONAWANE, J. DATE : 7th August, 2018. P.C. :- 1. The appellant did not remove the office objections. The appellant has preferred an appeal, but there were office objections notified by the Registry. The learned Counsel for the appellant undertakes to remove office objections within stipulated period of two weeks. In case, appellant failed to remove the office objections, the appeal shall stands dismissed automatically without further reference to this Court. 2. In case office objections are removed, list this appeal for further process on 31st August, 2018. ( K.K. SONAWANE, J.)

Order - Status 8: Tandle IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 583 of 2018 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.772 OF 2018 Mrs. Lata w/o Hemant Garg ... Appellant/ Orig.Plaintiff Versus Nehru Nagar Sukhsagar CHS Ltd. & Anr. ... Respondent/ Orig. Defendant. . . . . . . Mr. Sushil Upadhye i/b A. M. Saraogi for the Appellant. Mr. S. R. Patel for the Respondent No.2. . . . . . . CORAM : A. S. GADKARI, J. DATE : 20th NOVEMBER, 2019 P. C. : 1] After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant at length, when this Court was not inclined to grant any relief, the learned counsel on instructions, seeks leave to withdraw the present application unconditionally. Leave granted. 2] Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. 3] In view of the dismissal of the Appeal, Civil Application No. 772 of 2018 does not survive and is accordingly disposed off. (A. S. GADKARI, J.)