Pandurang Rama Gaikwad v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

ra39.19 (1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO.39 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.611 OF 2019 Pandurang s/o Rama Gaikwad ..APPLICANT

VERSUS

The State of Maharashtra & ors.

..RESPONDENTS Mr Ganesh D. Angad, Advocate for applicant;

Mrs M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondent nos.1 to 3 CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.

DATE : 5th March, 2019 ORAL ORDER:

Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant at length.

2.

By way of the present review petition/application, the petitioner is seeking review of the order dated 17th January, 2019. 3.

The petitioner was before this Court with a prayer for issuance of quo warranto against respondent no.4 through respondent no.1 and recording these facts, in addition to the fact that the petitioner, a retired employee of police department is challenging the appointment order of respondent no.4, the petition is dismissed as we were not inclined to entertain the petition at the instance of a person who is a retired

ra39.19 (2) employee. Seeking a challenge to appointment of another employee, nothing was placed on record that by such an appointment any of the right of the petitioner was infringed or the appointment of respondent no.4 caused some hindrance in the employment of the petitioner when he was in service. Considering all these grounds, the petition was dismissed. 4.

It is the settled position of law that there is a very limited scope to entertain the review application and that too on the settled grounds, such as an error apparent on the face of record or a misrepresentation before the Court. None of these grounds could come in play to entertain the review application.

5.

Having regard to all aforesaid grounds, we are of the opinion that the review application is thoroughly meritless and the same is accordingly dismissed.

(S.M. GAVHANE, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) amj