Gramaudyogik Shikshan Mandal Aurangabad Through Its General Secretary And Another v. Satish Rohidas Pawar And Others

1 14344.2017CA.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14344 OF 2017 IN REVIEW APPLICATION (ST) NO.28039 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO.471 OF 2014 GRAMAUDYOGIK SHIKSHAN MANDAL AURANGABAD THROUGH ITS GENERAL SECRETARY AND ANOTHER .. Applicants

VERSUS

SATISH ROHIDAS PAWAR AND OTHERS .. Respondents ...

Advocate for the Applicants :

Shri Ajay S. Deshpande Advocate for Respondent no.1 :

Shri R.J. Godbole AGP for Respondents/State :

Miss S.S. Raut ...

WITH REVIEW APPLICATION (ST) NO.28039 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO.471 OF 2014 CORAM : P.R. BORA, J.

Dated: January 22, 2018 PER COURT :

1.

Heard. Delay of 95 days caused in filing the review application is condoned.

2.

The order dated 18th April, 2017 has been passed by this

2 14344.2017CA.doc Court relying upon the earlier reported Judgment of this Court in the case of Madhao s/o Somaji Sarode Vs. Jotiba Dhyan Upasak Shikshan Sanstha Dudhala and Others, 2004 (3) Mh.L.J. 1078. It is evident that, the Judgment in the case of Madhao s/o Somaji Sarode Vs. Jotiba Dhyan Upasak Shikshan Sanstha Dudhala (cited supra) was not brought to the notice of this Court (Coram: S.V. Gangapurwala, J.) while passing order in Writ Petition No.3571 of 2013 on 25th April, 2013. After having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it does not appear to me that, any apparent error has occurred in the order passed by this Court on 18th April, 2017 so as to cause any modification in the said order. No prejudice is likely to be caused to the applicants because of such order. As such, I do not see any reason for entertaining the review application. The same, therefore, stands rejected. ( P.R. BORA, J. ) ggpunde