1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO.11 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2234 OF 2008 Dr.Anjali C. Dharmangaonkar .. Petitioner Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. .. Respondents Petitioner in person Mr.R.S.Shekhawat, earlier Advocate for petitioner present Ms.S.M.Mondle for respondent nos.1 and 2 Mr.R.L.Nevlekar for respondent nos.4 CORAM: J.N. PATEL & Smt.V.K.TAHILRAMANI, JJ. DATE: JUNE 11, 2009 (IN CHAMBER AT 3.15 P.M.) P.C. 1. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was prosecuting her remedy diligently and had also preferred a departmental appeal and therefore, the ground on which this court was likely to dismiss the petition i.e. on delay and latches couldn’t have been fair. The advocate then appearing for the petitioner in order to 2 save the case made a concession which according to the petitioner had adversely affected her case on merits. 3. In our view, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that she has not been given a fair opportunity, may be due to mistake on the part of the counsel, she should not suffer and, therefore, in order to give a fair opportunity to the petitioner, we are recalling our order. 4. The matter be placed afresh for admission before another bench. Petitioner to move honourable the Chief Justice for listing the matter for admission. Review Petition stands disposed of accordingly. (J.N. Patel, J.) (Smt. V.K.Tahilramani, J.)