1 IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY C.A.J. C.A.J. C.A.J. REVIEW PETITION NO. 65 OF 2005 IN WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 1914 OF 1999 PETITION NO. 1914 OF 1999 PETITION NO. 1914 OF 1999 Deepa Gourang Murdeshwar Katre ... Petitioner Vs. The Principal, Vidyavardhini Annasaheb Vartak College of Arts & Ors. ... Respondents Ms. S.V. Deshmukh for Petitoienr. Mrs. S.S. Bhende, A.G.P. for R. No. 4. Mr. J..M. Chodankar for R. No. 1. CORAM CORAM CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & S.P. S.P. S.P. KUKDAY,JJ. KUKDAY,JJ. KUKDAY,JJ. DATED DATED DATED : MAY 05, 2005 : MAY 05, 2005 : MAY 05, 2005 P.C. P.C. P.C. . The review is based on the contention that six advertisements for the post of Lecturer in English having interchangibility clause was advertised on 13.4.1999 and considering that directions given by this court in the Judgment dated 30.4.2005 requires to be reviewed. . We have considered the contention of the learned counsel for the Review Applicant. We find that after advertisement was issued, petitioner approached this court by way of writ Petition NO. 1914 of 1999on 12.7.11999 and interim relief was granted in terms of Prayer Clause (g). Pryer Clause (g) was to the effect that the services of 2 the Petitioner should not be terminated and that she should be allowed to continue. As such the Management could not have proceeded with interview and by letter of 13.7.1999, considering the order of this court issued letter of appointment in favour of the Petitioner herein. . Considering the above, as the interviews could not be conducted in terms of the sixth advertisements, we do not find this to be a fit case to review the order dated 13.4.2005. With the above directions, application stands disposed of. No order as to costs. (F.I. (F.I. (F.I. REBELLO,J.) REBELLO,J.) REBELLO,J.) (S.P. (S.P. (S.P. KUKDAY,J.) KUKDAY,J.) KUKDAY,J.)