-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (LG.) NO.44 OF 2005 IN WRIT PETITION NO.522 OF 2005 Shri Nilesh Wamanrao Gaikwad. .. Petitioner v/s. Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority & ors. .. Respondents Mr.A.V.Anturkar i/by Mr.K.K. Waghmare for petitioner. Ms.G.R. Shastri for respondent No.1. ----- CORAM : H.L. GOKHALE & CORAM : H.L. GOKHALE & CORAM : H.L. GOKHALE & S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, JJ. S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, JJ. S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, JJ. DATE : 19th August 2005 DATE : 19th August 2005 DATE : 19th August 2005 P.C. : P.C. : P.C. : 1. Heard Mr.Anturkar in support of this Review Petition. Ms.Shastri is present for respondent No.1-Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority. 2. We have perused our order dated 20th April 2005 which is sought to be reviewed. 3. Mr.Anturkar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was having the necessary qualifications. Ms.Shastri, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.1-Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority, has pointed out that when the impugned -2- order was passed it was brought to the notice of the Court that the architectural qualifications were material for the post and it was a mistake to include other qualifications. That is why the impugned order was passed. We do no think that there is any reason to recall that order. Review Petition is rejected. (H.L. GOKHALE, J.) (H.L. GOKHALE, J.) (H.L. GOKHALE, J.) (S.C. DHARMADIKARI, J.) (S.C. DHARMADIKARI, J.) (S.C. DHARMADIKARI, J.)