ORDER : Arvind Kumar Verma, J. 1. Applicant has filed this petition seeking review/recall of the order dated 08.07.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.3355/2025 (Priya Mishra versus National Testing Agency & Anr). Relevant portion of said order reads as under: “ 6 . Considering the aspects of the present petition, it is noteworthy that the case of the petitioner was already dismissed by this Court vide order dated 29.01.2025 in WPC No. 1197 of 2019, therefore, the present petition is not maintainable. 7. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as having being not maintainable”. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that earlier the applicant has filed the writ petition, (WPC No.1197/2019, Priya Mishra versus University Grant Commission & Ors) before this Court, which came to be dismissed on 29.01.2025 observing that none appears on behalf of the petitioner/applicant herein even in the second round. She contended that this Court has decided the writ petition (WPC No.1197/2019) in absence of the applicant, therefore, her right has not been adjudicated. Relevant portion of order dated 29.01.2025 reads as under: “6 . Taking into consideration the fact that such permission cannot be granted according to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above-reported matters, accordingly, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No. cost(s).” 3. Thereafter, applicant has filed the restoration application (MCC No. 222/2025), which also came to be dismissed on 05.03.2025 giving liberty to the applicant to take recourse to law. Relevant portion of said order reads as under: “ 5. The applicant has filed an application for restoration of WPC No.1197 of 2019 on the ground that she could not appear on 29.01.2025 in two rounds when the matter was taken up for hearing. The order passed in the writ petition would show that the matter was finally decided on merits in light of the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and thus, no case is made out for the recall of the order. Therefore, the application for restoration is hereby dismissed. 6 . However, the applicant would be at liberty to take recourse to law. 4. Thereafter, the applicant has filed the fresh writ petition (W.P.C No.3355/2025) before this Court which has been dismissed on 08.07.2025 as not maintainable. Since, the dispute remains undecided, this review petition has been filed for review of order dated 08.07.2025. 5. 6 . However, the applicant would be at liberty to take recourse to law. 4. Thereafter, the applicant has filed the fresh writ petition (W.P.C No.3355/2025) before this Court which has been dismissed on 08.07.2025 as not maintainable. Since, the dispute remains undecided, this review petition has been filed for review of order dated 08.07.2025. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 contended that matter in question, regarding the merit in rounding of marks, in the present case has already been decided by this Court vide order dated 29.01.2025 in WPC No.1197 of 2019, wherein claim of the petitioner/applicant was dismissed on merits. Thereafter, applicant has preferred an application against the order dated 29.01.2025 by filing an MCC No.222/2025 which came to be dismissed by this Court on 05.03.2025 due to lack of any merit. Thereafter, applicant has filed the fresh petition (W.P.C No.3355/2025), which also came to be dismissed by this Court on 08.07.2025. Against which, present review petition has been filed by the applicant, however, there is no reason of interfering with the said order/decision passed by this Court and present review petition is not maintainable in the eye of law. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the review petition including the orders of this Court. 7. It is pertinent to mention here that first writ petition filed by the applicant was registered as WPC No.1197/2019 and co-ordinate Bench of this Court has dismissed the said writ petition on merits on 29.01.2025. Against which, applicant has preferred an restoration application (MCC No.222/2025) which also came to be dismissed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 05.03.2025 observing that order passed in writ petition (WPC No.1197/2019) would show that the matter was finally decided on merits in light of the judgments passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and thus, no case is made out for the recall of the order. However, the applicant would be at liberty to take recourse to law. On basis of which, applicant has filed the fresh petition (W.P.C No.3355/2025) before this Court, which has been dismissed on 08.07.2025 on the ground that applicant’s petition has already been decided by co-ordinate Bench of this Court, therefore, fresh petition is not maintainable. 8. Once a writ petition has been adjudicated on merits, the sole remedy available to the aggrieved party is to avail the statutory remedy of appeal before the Division Bench. 8. Once a writ petition has been adjudicated on merits, the sole remedy available to the aggrieved party is to avail the statutory remedy of appeal before the Division Bench. In such circumstances, no ground is made out for entertaining the present review petition. 9. Accordingly, the instant review petition stands dismissed as not maintainable. Certified copy as per rules.