-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE Review Petition St No. 4263 of 2005 in Writ Petition No.95l5 of 2004 Pooja Padmakar Katkade- Petitioner vs Nirmala Tukaram Bankar & ors.. respondents Mr R.S.Apte with N R Bubna for Petitioner Mr N V Bandiwadekar for respondent no.l Mr. S.D.Dighe for respondent nos 5 and 6 Mr.C.R.Sonawane AGP for State CORAM;A.P.SHAH & S.C.DHARMADHIKARI JJ Dated ll.7.2005 P C: . Heard learned counsel for the parties. . In our view the review petition is totally misconceived and not maintainable. The petitioner was not party to the writ petition filed by the lst respondent which has been allowed by our order dated l4.l2.2004. Even on merits we do not see any ground for reviewing our order. It is seen that the lst respondent was appointed on the post in question in l997. The review petition who was working in the same school did not make any -2- grievance about the appointment of the petitioner till 2003. On the basis of the complaint made by the review petitioner for the first time in 2003 the Education Officer directed cancellation of approval which was granted on l5.l0.l997 without any notice to the lst respondent. The Education Officer ought not to have entertained such belated complaint and revoked approval granted to the petitioner’s appointment as far back as in l997. Review petition is dismissed. . In view of the disposal of the review petition no orders on Civil Application No.920 of 2005.