WPMS No. 1543 of 2010 Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J. Mr. Siddhartha Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Brief Holder for the State. The revisional court passed an order dated 8th January, 2010, the petitioner, being aggrieved by the said order, filed a restoration application alleging that the said order was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The restoration application was dismissed on the ground that the impugned order clearly indicated that both the parties were heard and, consequently, the application for restoration did not appear to be bonafide. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the said order, has filed the present writ petition. Having perused the restoration application, the Court finds that there is no specific averment to the extent that the observation of the revisional court that both the parties were heard was incorrect. No specific ground to that effect has been made by the petitioner. Consequently, this court is not inclined to interfere in the order rejecting the restoration application since the court finds that parties were heard. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. It would be open to the petitioner to challenge the order of the revisional court dated 8th January, 2010, if so advised. (Tarun Agarwala, J.) Dated 01.09.2010 Shiv