Mrs. Vijaya Sunil Sangawar (Before Marriage - Vijaya Shankarrao Shriramwar) v. The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. Of Higher And Technical Edu., Mumbai And ORS

2025:BHC-NAG:8993-DB 1 1-MCA No.722.2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 722 OF 2024 (REVIEW) IN WRIT PETITION NO. 1504 OF 2023 (D) Dr. Mrs. Vijaya Sunil Sangawar ..VS..

The State of Maharashtra and others -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. N. Z. Mirza, Advocate for Applicant.

Mr. A. V. Palshikar, AGP for Respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 5 & 6. Mr. Sandeep Marathe, Advocate for Respondent No.7. CORAM : SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, AND SMT. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

DATED : 12 th SEPTEMBER, 1.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant-original petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 and Mr. Sandeep Marathe, learned Counsel for respondent No.7.

2.

Present application is filed by the applicant-original petitioner for review of the order of this Court passed in Writ Petition No.1504/2023, dated 15th July, 2024. 3.

It is agreed by the applicant as well as respondents that both the parties stood retired. The applicant is retired in the month of April 2022 and respondent No.7 stood retired on 30th June, 2025. The learned Counsel for the

2 1-MCA No.722.2024 applicant failed to made out any ground to review the order. There is no error apparent on the face of record. The applicant/petitioner participated in the departmental proceedings, which were subsequently quashed and set aside by the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. Therefore, this Court already observed that it is unacceptable that the applicant/petitioner was not aware about the passing of the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal for six years.

4.

As such, we do not see any reason to entertain the present application. The Civil Application stands dismissed. (VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) Kirtak