1 wp6826.sxw ssp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6826 OF 2010 Smt.Rohini Sanjay Gupta ...Petitioner vs. Siddhivinayak Magasvargiya Mahila Bachat Gat and others ...Respondents Mr.S.P.Kanuga i/b Mr.J.S.Chandnani for the petitioner Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P for respondent nos.2 and 3 Mr.Mukesh Aiya i/b Mr.Hitesh Vyas for the respondent no.1 CORAM :A.S.OKA,J. DATE : OCTOBER 18, 2010 P.C.: 1 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the first respondent and the learned A.G.P for the 2 nd and 3 rd respondents. The order impugned has been passed on alleged applications for review made by the first respondent and one Vijaya Rama Mane. By the impugned order, the alleged review application of the first respondent was allowed and the review petition of the said Vijaya Ramchandra Mane was rejected. 2 The learned counsel for the first respondent states that instead of keeping the petition pending in this Court, impugned order passed on the application made by the first respondent be set aside with liberty to the first respondent to file a fresh application seeking review of the earlier order passed by the State Government on 24 th August 2009. The request made is reasonable which deserves to be accepted. The learned counsel for the first respondent states that a fresh 2 wp6826.sxw application will be filed by the first respondent within a period of one week from today. 3 Hence, the petition is disposed of by passing following order : i) Impugned order dated 18 th August 2010 is quashed and set aside in so far as review application allegedly made by the first respondent is concerned with liberty to the first respondent to file an application for review. ii)If application for review is made within a period of one week from today, the same shall be decided in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date on which the same is filed. iii)All contentions of the parties in the fresh review application are expressly kept open. iv)The learned counsel for the petitioner agrees that the review application before the State Government is maintainable. v) It will be open for the first respondent to file appropriate application for appropriate interim relief in the review petition. vi)Writ petition is disposed of in above terms. vii)The State Government to act upon an authenticated copy of this order. JUDGE