1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO.136 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7618 OF 2009 Vishwas Anand Bachhav .. Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.R.K.Mendadkar for the petitioner Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for the State CORAM : J. N. Patel & Smt.Mridula Bhatkar, JJ DATE : December 4, 2009 (IN CHAMBER AT 2.35 P.M.) P.C. : 1. This review petition has been filed by the petitioner so as to point out that the Scrutiny Committee which passed the impugned order constituted of Mr.M.K.More, Research Officer who has actually participated in the Vigilance Cell inquiry and, therefore, the decision of the Committee is vitiating by the vice of bias, as one of the members of the Committee was concerned with the enquiry conducted by Vigilance Cell wherein the findings are adverse to 2 the petitioner. 2. The learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondent Scrutiny Committee states that this irregularity can be cured by constituting a Committee with another person in place of Mr.M.K.More, Research Officer and this court orders the respondent Scrutiny Committee to re-examine the matter from the Stage it was taken up by the Scrutiny Committee after receipt of all reports including the report made by Mr.M.K.More, Research Officer. 3. We therefore, recall our order dt.20.07.2009 passed in Writ Petition No.7818 of 2008 and set aside the impugned order with a direction to the petitioner to appear before the Scrutiny Committee on 14.12.2009 before the reconstituted Committee and would extend all cooperation to the Scrutiny Committee. The Scrutiny Committee would take a decision in the matter of validity of Scrutiny Committee of the petitioner after hearing the petitioner afresh, without being influenced by an earlier decision in the matter which has been quashed and set aside by this court in this review petition. 4. Review Petition stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. ( J. N. Patel, J) (Smt.Mridula Bhatkar, J)