MADHURI SAVLIRAM GUNJALversusMAHARASHTRA MEDICAL COUNCIL THRU REGISTRAR AND ANR

                                                                          901-WP-11881-2026 (AS).doc

    Ashwini
                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                     WRIT PETITION NO. 11881 OF 2026

                   Madhuri Savliram Gunjal alias
                   Madhuri Dandekar                                 ...Petitioner

                           Versus

                   Maharashtra Medical Council
                   through Registrar & Anr.                         ...Respondents
                                                      ...
                   Adv. Saurabh Ghag, a/w Adv. Dakshata Sawant, Adv. Nikita
                   Chavan, Adv. Siddhant Raul, Adv. Sanghpriya Sarode and Adv.
                   Monali Gadhave for the Petitioner.

                   Adv. Brijesh Rathod for Respondent No.1.

                   Adv. Pravin Gaikwad, a/w Adv. Angelina B. C., i/by Adv. Ganesh
                   Dalvi for Respondent No.2.

                   Mr. Ashish Sawant, Respondent No.2, in-person, present.
                                                      ...

ASHWINI
                                    CORAM : MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, CJ. &
PRASAD
NARHIRE                                     ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.
Digitally signed
by ASHWINI
PRASAD
NARHIRE
Date: 2026.10.09
10:57:42 +0530


                                     DATE : 8th OCTOBER, 2026.
                   P.C.:
                   1.      Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                   2.      The learned counsel appearing for the parties and Mr. Ashish

                   Sawant, i.e. Respondent No.2, who is present in Court acknowledge

                   the Consent Terms and its execution dated 24 th September 2026,

                   which are already on record.



                                                      1/3
                                                       901-WP-11881-2026 (AS).doc


3.      Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that in view of the

Consent Terms dated 24 th September 2026, the Petitioner has

already withdrawn the complaints lodged against the Respondent

No.2.

4.      In order to facilitate the parties and give a quietus to the issue

in hand, we had adjourned the matter on 5th October 2026, in order

to enable the learned counsel for Respondent No.1, i.e Maharashtra

Medical Council, to obtain proper instructions with regard to the

restoration of Petitioner’s registration as a Medical Practitioner, in

light of the said Consent Terms dated 24 th September 2026. Today,

on instructions, he submits that Respondent No.1 is inclined to

pass an appropriate order in terms of the Consent Terms dated 24 th

September 2026, in case some breathing time is accorded to them.

5.      In view of the above facts and circumstances, we find that the

parties have already settled the matter in terms of the Consent

Terms dated 24th September 2026. Accordingly, the              Respondent

No.1 may pass an appropriate order on the issue of restoration of

Petitioner’s registration as a Medical Practitioner, in accordance

with law, within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading

of this order.

6.      We clarify that this Court has not adverted to the merits of

the matter.



                                    2/3
                                                    901-WP-11881-2026 (AS).doc


7.     Accordingly, with the aforesaid observations, the Writ Petition

is Disposed Of.




     [ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.]                     [CHIEF JUSTICE]




                                  3/3