Review Application No. 689 of 2011 Objection Against Review App. No. 13572 of 2011 In WPSB No. 145 of 2010 Hon’ble Barin Ghosh, C.J. Hon’ble U.C. Dhyani, J. Mr. Alok Dalakoti, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. A.K. Joshi, Advocate, for the review petitioner. Mr. Lok Pal Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 3. After having had quashed the appointment of respondent No. 3, by the order under review, the authority concerned was directed to make a fresh exercise for selecting a suitable candidate. In the instant Review Petition, petitioner is contending that she was next to respondent No. 3 in the merit list and, accordingly, she should have had been directed to be appointed. While disposing of the writ petition, by the order under review, the authority concerned was given a discretion to keep the fresh selection confined to those eligible candidates or to re-advertise the post. That order having been passed consciously, on a review of that order, a contrary order cannot be passed. The Review Application is misconceived and the same is dismissed. (U.C. Dhyani, J.) (Barin Ghosh, C.J.) 26.12.2011 G