1 Civil Application No.13579 of 2010 in Writ Petition No.6149 of 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13579 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6149 OF 2005 Sharmila D/o. Sureshchandra Surana APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others RESPONDENTS Mr.R.S.Deshmukh, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr.K.G.Patil, learned A.P.P. for respondent State. (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS, AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 21/01/2011 PER COURT : 1. Writ Petition No.6149/2005, filed by the petitioner came to be dismissed by the Court by its judgment dated 10/03/2010. The judgment states, “there being no merit in the petition, the same is dismissed. Rule is discharged with no orders as to costs.” It appears that the present application has been filed by the petitioner virtually seeking re-opening of the writ petition and urging for certain reliefs which can not be granted to the petitioner in the light of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court rendered in the writ petition filed by the petitioner. The petitioner prays for issuance of 2 Civil Application No.13579 of 2010 in Writ Petition No.6149 of 2005 appropriate directions so as to enable the applicant to approach afresh to the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal at its bench at Aurangabad by filing original application against an impugned order dated 15/10/2003 issued by the non applicant no.2 The Maharashtra Public Service Commission and also against the other impugned order dated 04/11/2003 issued by respondent no.3 The Deputy Secretary, Home Department, Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. Un-disputedly, the orders against which the petitioner prays for leave to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal were the orders impugned in the present petition. As pointed out by us above, this is not a review application which has been filed by the petitioner, but the petitioner under the garb of this application seeks issuance of directions to re-open the petition by passing orders and for grant of relief which had not been granted by the Bench which had decided his writ petition earlier. 2. In that light of the matter, once a matter has been decided finally, it can not be re-opened by an application seeking issuance of directions. The present application is not maintainable and is therefore dismissed with no orders as to costs. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/JAN. 2011/ca13579-10