Judgment 1. Heard Shri Malyekar, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Shri Ferreira, learned Asst. Solicitor General appearing for the Respondent no.1 and Shri Rodrigues, learned Addl. Government Advocate appearing for the Respondent no.2. 2. Rule. Heard forthwith with the consent of the learned Counsel. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents, waives service. 3. The above Petition challenges the Order passed by the Respondent no.1 dated 31.01.2011, whereby the Revision Petition preferred by the Petitioner came to be dismissed essentially on the ground that the application for renewal filed by the Petitioner was time barred. 4. During the course of the hearing of the above Petition, the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner as well as Respondents, do not dispute the fact that besides the ground of limitation, the Petitioner had also raised other contention in support of their Revision Petition. Apart from that, the Counsel appearing for the respective parties point out that in similar circumstances, this Court while disposing of Writ Petition no. 51/2011 dated 18.02.2011, had directed the Respondent no.1 to decide the issue of limitation along with the other issues raised by the Petitioner therein afresh after hearing the parties in accordance with law. The learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties further point out that considering that the facts in the present case are similar to the facts in the said Writ Petition no. 51/2011, it would be appropriate that the above Petition be disposed of in the lines of the Judgment passed by this Court dated 18.02.2011. 5. For the reasons stated in the Judgment dated 18.02.2011 in Writ Petition no. 51/2011, I find that the impugned order dated 31.01.2011 cannot be sustained and deserves to be quashed and set aside. All contentions of the parties on merits including the point of limitation will have to be decided by Respondent no.1 afresh in accordance with law. 6. In view of the above, I pass the following : ORDER (i) The impugned Order dated 31.01.2011 passed by the Respondent no.1 is quashed and set aside. Revision Application file no. 08/ (11)/2010-RC.II is restored to the file of the Respondent no.1. (ii) The Respondent no.1 is directed to decide the said Revision Application afresh after hearing the parties in accordance with law. (iii) All the contentions raised by the parties on merits including the point of limitation are left open. Revision Application file no. 08/ (11)/2010-RC.II is restored to the file of the Respondent no.1. (ii) The Respondent no.1 is directed to decide the said Revision Application afresh after hearing the parties in accordance with law. (iii) All the contentions raised by the parties on merits including the point of limitation are left open. (iv) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. (v) Petition stands disposed of accordingly with no Orders as to costs.