1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2956 OF 2008 IN REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO. 29335 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5489 OF 2008 Rakesh D. Tiwari. ..... ..... Petitioner. Versus Union of India & Ors. ..... ..... Respondents. Mr. Saikumar Ramamurthy for the Petitioner. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Respondents. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and J. P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 17TH JANUARY, 2009. P.C.: Considering the averments made in the application, the delay in filing the review petition is condoned. The Application is, accordingly, allowed. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (J. P. DEVADHAR, J.) 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO. 29335 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5489 OF 2008 Rakesh D. Tiwari. ..... ..... Petitioner. Versus Union of India & Ors. ..... ..... Respondents. Mr. Saikumar Ramamurthy for the Petitioner. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Respondents. CORAM : BILAL NAZKI and J. P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 17TH JANUARY, 2009. P.C.: The order passed by us in the writ petition on 17th October, 2008 is sought to be reviewed. 2. The allotment made in favour of the respondent in the writ petition was cancelled, which was challenged before the Tribunal. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that the cancellation of allotment was wrong and one of the grounds on which the Tribunal came to the above conclusion was that the cancellation of allotment order had been passed without issuing any show cause notice. In that context, we had passed the order dated 17th October, 2008. We do not find any ground to review this order. 3 3. The review petition is misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (J. P. DEVADHAR, J.)