JUDGMENT :

M.S. Sonak, J.

1. Heard Mr. M. B. Da Costa, learned Senior Advocate with Ms. K. Betquecar for the Appellant in First Appeal No.250 of 2009.

2. Heard Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Senior Advocate with Ms. Tanvi Kamat Ghanekar for Respondent No.1 in First Appeal No.250 of 2009.

3. Heard Mr. Sudin Usgaonkar, learned Senior Advocate with Ms. Tanvi Kamat Ghanekar for the Petitioner in Writ Petition No.983 of 2019. Ms. Priyanka Kamat learned Additional Government Advocate for Respondent No.2 in Writ Petition No.983 of 2019.

4. Mr. Usgaonkar, learned Senior Advocate for the Petitioner in Writ Petition No.983 of 2019 submits that all the Respondents in Writ Petition No.983 of 2019 are duly served. However, despite service, such Respondents neither appeared themselves nor through any Advocates.

5. The learned counsel for the parties agree that the Writ Petition and First Appeal are to be taken up together and can be disposed of by a common judgment and order. The learned counsel pointed out that in case the Writ Petition No.983 of 2019 is allowed, then, there may be no necessity of deciding First Appeal No.250 of 2009 on merits.

6. Writ Petition No.983 of 2019 challenges the order made