1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION STAMP NO. 24782 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders Court’s or Judge’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & N.D. DESHPANDE,JJ. DATE : 18th November, 2009 PER COURT : 1. The review application is taken up for admission. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by this court dated 26th August, 2009 needs to be reviewed, inasmuch as, an order adverse to the interest of the present applicants has been passed by this court, without the said persons being party to the said writ petition. 3. It is submitted that the applicants are the persons, who are the occupiers of the land, the construction wherein is sought to be removed by the Municipal Council in pursuance to the order under review. 4. The petition was filed by the petitioners praying for a direction that the respondent Municipal Council be directed to remove the encroachments on the open space, public road of Survey NO. 379/B of Chalisgaon. 5. We had disposed of the petition, after perusing 2 the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondent Municipal Council, that the measurement was directed to be made by the Taluka Inspector of Land Record and if it is found that there is some encroachment on the public road, appropriate action would be taken. The matter pertains to the encroachment of a public road. By recording a statement of assurance given by the Municipal Council, we had disposed of the petition. 6. Removal of the encroachment on the public road is the statutory duty of the Municipal Council. When the Municipal Council has stated on an affidavit that it would perform its statutory duty, we recorded the statement and disposed of the petition. The applicants have not been in a position to point out any document to show that any right vested in them in the land, which is earmarked for public road, has been infringed. 7. In that view of the matter, no case is made out for review of the order. Hence, the review application is rejected. [N.D. DESHPANDE,J] [B.R. GAVAI,J.] grt/- 3