FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR M.C.A. NO.990/2009 IN Writ Petition No. 1950/2009 [Ramprasad Ramchandra Chavan ..v.s. State of Mah & others] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Adkar advocate for applicant Shri A.M.Deshpande, AGP for respondent no. 1 to 4 Shri Tathod, advocate for respondent no.5. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 23, 2009. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the judgment dated 17.7.2009 in Writ Petition No.1950/2009. It is brought the notice of this court by the learned counsel for the applicant that the revisional order was passed on 7.1.2008, and the review application was filed on 20.2.2008, though it was wrongly conveyed to the court by the parties that the review application was filed on 2.3.2009. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, this court would not have held that the review application could not have been entertained by the respondent no.1, as it was filed after a period of one year from the passing of the revisional order on 7.1.2008, if it was aware that the review application was filed as early as on 20.2.2008. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, it appears that the judgment dated 17.7.2009 was passed due to misconception of facts. Though the review application was filed on 20.2.2008, it was conveyed that the review application was filed on 2.3.2009 and this court has therefore, held that the review application could not have been entertained after a period of one year from the date of revisional order. In the facts and circumstances of the case, it would be necessary to recall the judgment dated 17.7.2009 in Writ Petition No.1950/2009 and hear the writ petition afresh. In the result the Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed. Writ Petition No.1950/2009, should be listed before this Court for admission on5.12.2009. JUDGE SMP