12WP2829-26.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2829 OF 2026 Pranali Jayant Sawant & Ors ...Petitioners Versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents _______ None for the petitioners. Later on Mr. Ajit Kenjale, for the Petitioners present. Mr. V. G. Badgujar, AGP for the State. Mr. Sachinam Misra with Ashutosh Mishra, for Respondent No.2. _______ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ. DATE: 22 JUNE 2026 P.C. 1. None for the petitioners. It appears that the petitioner has lost interest to prosecute the present proceedings. 2. Dismissed for want of prosecution. Later on 3. Mr.Kenjale, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners tenders apology for his absence when the matter was called out earlier, and requested to restore this petition. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is restored to the file of this Court. We have hence proceeded to hear the parties. P. V. Rane PRASHANT VILAS RANE Digitally signed by PRASHANT VILAS RANE Date: 2026.06.23 13:40:17 +0530 12WP2829-26.DOC 5. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. The petitioners admittedly are the employees of the State Government and posted with the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Consumer Commissions. Not only the impugned Government Resolution in question but also the impugned transfer order are issued by the State Government. 6. In this view of the matter, considering the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in L. Chandra Kumar vs Union Of India And Others1 the appropriate remedy for the petitioners, is to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. The petition is accordingly disposed of. All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open. 7. In the event appropriate proceedings are filed within two weeks from today, the same be considered on merits, without an objection as to limitation, considering that the petitioners were bonafide pursuing the present petition. 8. Disposed of. No costs. 9. Merely to enable the petitioners to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, for the period of four weeks, the ad-interim order dated 27 February 2026 passed by this Court shall continue to operate. However, such continuation shall not be construed as an expression of any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions. (AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) 1 AIR 1997 SC 1125 P. V. Rane