1` IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 5842/2007 Ku. Rekha d/o Bhimrao Chopade vs. Swami Vivekanand Mandal, Murtizapur and others. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : A.P.LAVANDE, J DATE : 16.6.2008 Heard Mr. Kadu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A.K.Choube, learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Mr. D.B.Patel, learned A.G.P. for respondents 3 and 4. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 20.9.2001 passed by the School Tribunal, Amravati in Appeal No. 61/2001 dismissing her appeal filed against the order of termination issued by the respondent no.1 as well as the order dated 16.10.2007 dismissing the application for condonation of delay in filing the application for review. By order dated 20th September, 2001 the School Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner placing reliance upon the Judgment of this Court in Anna Manikrao Pethe vs. Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Amravati (1997(3) Mh. L.J. 697. On 14.6.2007 the petitioner filed review application along with the application for condonation of delay inter alia on the ground that the Judgment in Anna Pethe's case has been reversed by the Full Bench by Judgment reported in 2007(1) Mh. L.J. 597. The Tribunal, by order dated 16.10.2007 dismissed the application for condonation of 2` delay holding that there was no sufficient cause for condoning the delay and consequently the review application also stood dismissed. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the record I find that no jurisdictional error has been committed by the School Tribunal while passing the impugned order dated 16.10.2007 refusing to condone the delay. The findings given by the School Tribunal while passing the impugned order cannot be said to be perverse warranting interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction of this court. The Presiding Officer, School Tribunal was justified in holding that the petitioner has not made out sufficient cause for condoning the delay of more than five years. In so far as the challenge in the original order dated 20.9.2001 is concerned the petitioner is guilty of gross laches and on this count only the petition does not deserve to be admitted. For the reasons aforesaid I find no merit in the petition. The petition is dismissed. Judge patle 3`