IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.88 of 2007 M/S MAA DURGA ENTERPRISES & AN Versus BIHAR STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES C ----------- 4. 6.5.08 Heard Mr. K.D. Chaterjee for the petitioners, and Mr. Uma Kant Singh for opposite party nos. 1 and 2. None appears on behalf of opposite party nos. 3 and 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, consequent upon the elevation of the previous counsel to the Bench of this Court, there was a change of Advocate on record on behalf of the petitioner. It was for this reason that the Hon’ble Judge refused to hear the matter when it was placed before him on 11.8.2006. It is further stated that the new Advocate-on- record did not appear because of the short time at his disposal after he received the Vakalatnama and, therefore he could not appear when the writ petition was taken up for admission on 1.9.2006, and was disposed of on merits. Mr. Chaterjee has also taken me through the counter affidavit of respondent nos.1 and 2 in the writ proceeding and submits that he has strong case to argue. On a consideration of the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, it appears to me that it would serve the ends of justice if the 2 order dated 1.9.2006, passed in C.W.J.C. No.12998 of 2003, is recalled and the matter is taken up a- fresh on merits. This application is allowed. The order dated 1.9.2006, passed in C.W.J.C. No.12998 of 2006, is hereby recalled and the writ petition is restored to its original file. ( S. K. Katriar, J.) Vinay/