1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR C.A.W. NO. 1732/2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.592/1999 ( Mukesh Manubhai Patel -: versus :- Gondia Education Society and others ) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND F.M. REIS, JJ. DATED : OCTOBER 05, 2009. Heard Shri S.P. Bhandarkar, learned Counsel for applicant, Shri A. Parchure, learned Counsel for respondent no.1, Ms. T. Khan, learned counsel for respondent no.3 and learned A.G.P. for respondent no.4. On very first date, a question was put to the learned Counsel for applicant whether he had talk with earlier counsel who represented the petitioner before us, when the judgment sought to be reviewed, was delivered. He fairly stated that there was no such occasion and no need, as no allegations against such counsel were being made. The argument today is, this Court has recorded statement of Secretary of the respondent which shows that entire arrears of salary has been paid to the petitioner. According to the learned counsel, the statement is incorrect. He relies upon certain developments to state that the statement is incorrect. He states that petitioner was 2 already in part time employment and his services were duly approved, hence there was no occasion for the petitioner to submit again to the process of selection by moving fresh application. The statement then made before us has been recorded by us in paragraph no.5 and because of that statement, this Court has not considered the controversy, then arising for determination. In these circumstances, we are not inclined to interfere in the matter by recalling the order and by restoring the Writ Petition again back to file for fresh consideration. Shri Bhandarkar, learned Counsel has stated that the petitioner is placed in dilemma, because he cannot approach the Hon’ble Apex court in view of the concession recorded and he has to initiate appropriate proceeding for redressal of his grievances. We find that the statements are appropriately recorded in the judgment and there is no material before us to hold otherwise at this juncture. The applicant/petitioner is at liberty to take further appropriate proceedings, if those statements are incorrect. The application is therefore, rejected with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE Rgd.