1 Review Application No.240/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO.240 OF 2010 IN CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO.147 OF 2007 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION STAMP NO.18916 OF 2010 Trimurti Pawan Pratishthan ... PETITIONER VERSUS Tahsildar/ Mamlatdar, Tahsil Office, Newasa & others ... RESPONDENTS ..... Mrs. Asha Rasal, Advocate for petitioner Shri V.H. Dighe, A.P.P. for respondents 1 to 4 Shri D.G. Nagode, Advocate for respondents 5 to 8 Shri V.R. Bhumkar, Advocate for respondents 11 and 12 ..... CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 20th April, 2011 PER COURT : 1. Heard the counsel for review applicant. Learned counsel submits that a wrong statement was made that Civil Revision Application was to be withdrawn and no steps are taken. However, nothing of such situation prevail. The order dated 13/12/2010 reads as under : 2 Review Application No.240/2010 “Counsel called absent, Counsel again called, absent. It was informed that the Civil Revision Application is to be withdrawn. However, no steps. The challenge is to the orders of learned Tahsildar and Sub-Divisional Officer, subject of creation of alleged barrage by the revision applicant. Since the counsel is absent, Civil Revision Application is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, Civil Application Stamp No.18916/2010 dismissed.” 2. Mr. Nagode for respondent Nos.5 to 8 and Mr. Bhumkar for respondent Nos.11 and 12 are present. They virtually agree that the order dated 13/12/2010 needs to be recalled. Considering the fact situation, the order referred above is recalled. Keep the revision for hearing afresh. Application allowed. K.U. CHANDIWAL JUDGE fmp/rp240.10